We stopped synchronizing; it was too much hassle and too risky. We use "Backup - Restore," which guarantees an identical library for all musicians.
If a minor modification occurs, with well-established and defined file names, we send the PDF, and the import will replace the correct piece. The only problem still being encountered is that the libraries aren't watertight. If one manager manages Library A and another manages Library B, both must agree before naming a file. This is very dangerous because, rarely, the two names can be identical. And then it's a disaster: the user doesn't know they've updated a file in two libraries. And even if they did, what could they do?
We're eagerly awaiting a separate directory for each librairy and a easy and non confusing librairy change, and display.
MS seems to be more specialized in creating huge books for geeks? This is not how teaching or transmitting scores for rehearsals and the evolution of a work in preparation works. We'd like it to become more efficient for sharing music between different musicians and groups. I'm surprised that everyone seems comfortable with these risks. Perhaps MS isn't widely used for sharing sheet music, except among geeks?
When you go to a (real) bookstore you ask for a title, not a content analysis. Happy you decide not to open the Pandora Box with the concept of " the hash of the original content" witch is another "geek" concept not useful for people spending time in... music (
, for Itsme)
If a minor modification occurs, with well-established and defined file names, we send the PDF, and the import will replace the correct piece. The only problem still being encountered is that the libraries aren't watertight. If one manager manages Library A and another manages Library B, both must agree before naming a file. This is very dangerous because, rarely, the two names can be identical. And then it's a disaster: the user doesn't know they've updated a file in two libraries. And even if they did, what could they do?
We're eagerly awaiting a separate directory for each librairy and a easy and non confusing librairy change, and display.
MS seems to be more specialized in creating huge books for geeks? This is not how teaching or transmitting scores for rehearsals and the evolution of a work in preparation works. We'd like it to become more efficient for sharing music between different musicians and groups. I'm surprised that everyone seems comfortable with these risks. Perhaps MS isn't widely used for sharing sheet music, except among geeks?
When you go to a (real) bookstore you ask for a title, not a content analysis. Happy you decide not to open the Pandora Box with the concept of " the hash of the original content" witch is another "geek" concept not useful for people spending time in... music (
