Web: Review GSoC page

Web: Review GSoC page

This applies a number of edits following discussion in several
threads, mostly on lilypond-devel.

Basically it contains:

- Review all existing GSoC suggestions, above all with regard to
  availability of mentors (after a survey)
- sort suggestions by availability of mentors
- Add one new project suggestion

There is one more project suggestion around: chord structures, but
I don't know how to make a sufficiently short presentation for this
page.


Commits:

Web/GSoC: Insert Spanner-per-Voice project suggestion


Web/GSoC: Sort projects by mentor availability

Sort in descending order by
- confirmed mentor available
- secondary mentor available
- no confirmed mentors

Web/GSoC: Review Compilation project description


Web/GSoC: Review Beaming project description


Web/GSoC: Review Glyphs project description


Web/GSoC: Review Slurs project description


Web/GSoC: Review MusicXML project description


Web/GSoC: Review Grace Notes project description


Web/GSoC: Review ScholarLY project description


Web/GSoC: Review list introduction

[pwm, 2016-02-06 20:53:34]

Thanks for working on this Urs.  Here are my strong opinions and suggested
revisions.  Make of them what you will!

-Paul

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:909: anyone who is interested in developing
LilyPond.
Why don't we just shorten this paragraph to:

Below is a list of suggested projects for GSoC or for anyone who is interested
in developing LilyPond.  (Last updated: February 2016)

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:916: you're welcome to suggest it.
How about simplifying this paragraph to:

If you have ideas for a GSoC project that is not listed below, please send us an
email on our developer mailing list (see @ref{Contact}).  There are a number of
areas where LilyPond could be improved, and our development team is always
willing to help those who would like to tackle a project like those listed
below.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:925: case.
This should come before the text about the sourceforge list, otherwise which
list does it refer to?  It would probably go best before the text about other
projects that are not on the project list.  I would suggest rewording it as
follows:

Mentor availability varies from project to project and from year to year.  Send
us an email on our developer mailing list (see @ref{Contact}), and we will help
you find a mentor for a project that fits your interests and skills.

I see no problem in changing the sort order, but I'd rather not specify the sort
order, as it seems like a distraction and a future maintenance burden.  The list
isn't that long and we want students to read the whole thing and contact us if
there's any project they're interested in.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1088: project from 2015.
I would shorten to:

There are several possibilities for this project, including building upon the
MusicXML export project from GSoC 2015.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1091: @strong{Requirements:} MusicXML, Python,
(Scheme), basic LilyPond knowledge
(Scheme) --> Scheme

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1092: @strong{Potential Mentors:} None
confirmed for 2016
I would keep the names of potential mentors (partly for easy reference in future
years or in the "off-season"), but just list their status as well.  For example:

@strong{Potential Mentors:} Reinhold Kainhofer, Mike Solomon (neither are
available for GSoC 2016)

Same suggestion for all listings like this.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1107: achievements with regard to LilyPond's
default output quality.
I don't think this is needed.  It breaks out of the pattern of just describing
the project and gets into editorializing about its comparative worth relative to
other projects, or even how rewarding it would be.  Maybe someone would find
another project more rewarding?  Seems like this is better suited for a
conversation with a student.

[git, 2016-02-07 23:05:53]

Incorporating suggestions by Paul Morris

[git, 2016-02-07 23:07:27]

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:909: anyone who is interested in developing
LilyPond.
On 2016/02/06 20:53:30, pwm wrote:
> Why don't we just shorten this paragraph to:
> 
> Below is a list of suggested projects for GSoC or for anyone who is interested
> in developing LilyPond.  (Last updated: February 2016)

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:916: you're welcome to suggest it.
On 2016/02/06 20:53:31, pwm wrote:
> How about simplifying this paragraph to:
> 
> If you have ideas for a GSoC project that is not listed below, please send us
an
> email on our developer mailing list (see @ref{Contact}).  There are a number
of
> areas where LilyPond could be improved, and our development team is always
> willing to help those who would like to tackle a project like those listed
> below.

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:925: case.
On 2016/02/06 20:53:30, pwm wrote:
> This should come before the text about the sourceforge list, otherwise which
> list does it refer to?  It would probably go best before the text about other
> projects that are not on the project list.  I would suggest rewording it as
> follows:
> 
> Mentor availability varies from project to project and from year to year. 
Send
> us an email on our developer mailing list (see @ref{Contact}), and we will
help
> you find a mentor for a project that fits your interests and skills.
> 

Done with some adjustments.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1088: project from 2015.
On 2016/02/06 20:53:32, pwm wrote:
> I would shorten to:
> 
> There are several possibilities for this project, including building upon the
> MusicXML export project from GSoC 2015.

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1091: @strong{Requirements:} MusicXML, Python,
(Scheme), basic LilyPond knowledge
On 2016/02/06 20:53:32, pwm wrote:
> (Scheme) --> Scheme

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1107: achievements with regard to LilyPond's
default output quality.
On 2016/02/06 20:53:30, pwm wrote:
> I don't think this is needed.  It breaks out of the pattern of just describing
> the project and gets into editorializing about its comparative worth relative
to
> other projects, or even how rewarding it would be.  Maybe someone would find
> another project more rewarding?  Seems like this is better suited for a
> conversation with a student.

Hm, my intention was to draw the attention to the fact that this project relates
to actual engraving quality. But I've taken your suggestion.

[git, 2016-02-08 08:39:19]

Add Chord structure suggestion by Carl

[pwm, 2016-02-08 14:35:33]

LGTM, with one minor suggestion.  
Thanks Urs, I think this really improves this page.
-Paul

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/diff/1/Documentation/web/community.i...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:1107: achievements with regard to LilyPond's
default output quality.
On 2016/02/07 23:07:27, git wrote:
> On 2016/02/06 20:53:30, pwm wrote:
> > I don't think this is needed.  It breaks out of the pattern of just
describing
> > the project and gets into editorializing about its comparative worth
relative
> to
> > other projects, or even how rewarding it would be.  Maybe someone would find
> > another project more rewarding?  Seems like this is better suited for a
> > conversation with a student.
> 
> Hm, my intention was to draw the attention to the fact that this project
relates
> to actual engraving quality. But I've taken your suggestion.

Hmm... that's a good idea.  Maybe add this to the title?  "Improve engraving
quality of slurs and ties" or (if not the title) maybe in the first sentence:
"The engraving quality of the default curves of slurs and ties is often
unsatisfactory."

[ul_openlilylib.org, 2016-02-08 14:52:42]

Am 8. Februar 2016 15:35:33 MEZ, schrieb paulwmorris@gmail.com:
.
>
>> Hm, my intention was to draw the attention to the fact that this
>project relates
>> to actual engraving quality. But I've taken your suggestion.
>
>Hmm... that's a good idea.  Maybe add this to the title?  "Improve
>engraving quality of slurs and ties" or (if not the title) maybe in the
>first sentence: "The engraving quality of the default curves of slurs
>and ties is often unsatisfactory."
>

Thanks for the suggestion. I've updated and will upload the next patch set when
my laptop is online again

Urs

>https://codereview.appspot.com/285400043/
>
>_______________________________________________
>lilypond-devel mailing list
>lilypond-devel@gnu.org
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

[git, 2016-02-12 11:02:53]

Incorporate small touch upon Paul's suggestion