Re: centralization of lilypond development and forking (was: branching)

[Mike Solomon]

On Dec 11, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Graham Percival <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0200, Mike Solomon wrote:
>>   See:
>>   
>> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Allows-minimum-length-to-work-for-end-of-line-spanners-issue-7453046-td141952.html#a142870
>>   as one of several examples.  There is truth in anything David says,
>>   meaning that I (like him (and most of us on this list)) have caused bugs
>>   that I did not find or fix before someone else.  How, does this warrant
>>   this communication style?
> 
> Interesting.  I totally agree that lilypond has a problem (see
> below), but in that email chain I find myself nodding along with
> David.  I mean, he makes empirical claims (such as documentation
> about partial elliptic stencils) that I assume are accurate (since
> I doubt he would make empirical claims without checking that they
> are true).
> 

Anything empirical in there is accurate.

> 
> However, I am not blind to the end result of the communications.
> I mean, at the beginning of September 2012 (after the meeting at
> the ranch) I was more enthusiastic about LilyPond than I had been
> for the previous 5 years, but one month later I decided to pretty
> much quit the project.

This is bad.  If this were some ultimate, fatalistic consequence of 
participation in any open-source project, I’d shrug and move onto the next, but 
it is precisely because in every other project I participate in this _doesn’t_ 
exist that I’m going through pains to try to solve this here.

Cheers,
MS