MuseScore 2.2 Release Candidate
Today, we are announcing the release of the MuseScore 2.2 Release Candidate (RC). In general, a release candidate means that we have done everything we plan to do for the release, and we are welcoming one final round of testing to be sure we have not forgotten anything. In this case, the RC contains the alpha release of MS_General.sf3, and we are waiting for the new MuseScore SoundFont to be ready before the final release.
Assuming all goes well, there will be an official release of MuseScore 2.2 on March 27 that will be identical to this release candidate except for updated translations (see below) and the updated SoundFont. At that point, you can expect another announcement with full details on everything you need to know about MuseScore 2.2. We have in-progress release notes which list the bug fixes and new features in MuseScore 2.2. Our thanks to everyone who participated and helped us improve MuseScore!
If you find issues in this release candidate, we encourage you to post about them to our support forum. If you are sure you have found a bug and that it has not been reported already, you may post directly to the issue tracker. Please indicate that you found the bug in the 2.2-dev version.
Download MuseScore 2.2 RC
- Windows 10, 8, 7 - Vista & XP are not supported but should work
- Mac OS X 10.7 or higher
- Linux 64-bit
- Linux 32-bit
Translations
As of this release candidate, MuseScore 2.2 has been 95% or more translated into 20 different languages, with another 12 more than 80% translated and another 10 more than 50% translated. In all, there are 64 translations underway. We can still use your help completing as many of these translations as possible. If you would like to participate in the translation effort, you can get started by visiting Transifex. Below is a list of the languages that have been or are being translated so far:
STATUS | LANGUAGE |
---|---|
+95% | Polish, German, Czech, French, Portuguese (Brazil), Catalan, Italian, Japanese, Danish, Galician, Spanish, Dutch, Catalan (Valencian), Gaelic, Scottish, Hungarian, Swedish, Russian, Vietnamese |
+80% | Slovak, Chinese (Taiwan), Finnish, Greek, Arabic, Norwegian Bokmål, Arabic (Sudan), Ukrainian, Romanian, Faroese, Slovenian, Welsh |
+50% | Esperanto, Korean, Portuguese, Chinese (China), Estonian, Armenian, Serbian (Serbia), Afrikaans, Hebrew, Basque |
-50% | Lithuanian, Persian, Serbian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Asturian, Turkish, Arabic (Egypt), Thai, Irish, Belarusian, Indonesian, Mongolian (Mongolia), Georgian, Latvian, Hindi (India), Uzbek (Latin), Malayalam, Igbo, Kabyle, Arabic (Algeria), Norwegian Nynorsk |
Important notes
This release candidate is not yet supported on MuseScore.com, so 2.2RC scores might be rendered differently when uploaded. Also note that the release candidate is labeled 2.1.9 so it can be updated to 2.2 final.
Comments
I have a question, lasconic - the deadline for translations.
Thanks and greetings,
Gootector
In reply to I have a question, lasconic … by Gootector
Ciao Gootector. See, if useful https://musescore.org/en/node/270029
In reply to Ciao Gootector. See, if… by Shoichi
Hi, Shoichi. I'm correcting Italian instrument list. You have there a lot of inaccuracies. I deleted all unnecessary spaces and the translation is 0.06 KB less :D Many of instruments have two different names; for example: Tin whistle/Pemperino, Bombardino/Eufonio etc.
In reply to Hi, Shoichi. I'm correcting… by Gootector
thx
In reply to I have a question, lasconic … by Gootector
A couple of days before release: march 24th sounds good. After this date, translations might go into 2.2 but nothing guaranteed.
In reply to A couple of days before… by [DELETED] 5
OK, thanks. I will remember - 24th.
In reply to OK, thanks. I will remember … by Gootector
Polish done. We're waiting for new version.
Greetings and thanks,
Gootector
Hello,
If the download files given on this page are for musescore 2.2 RC, why are they titled musescore 2.19?
Thanks, Sam
In reply to Hello,… by Sambaji
There are some changes that will definitely be made, so 2.19 was assigned as the version number pending the final release of 2.2.
In reply to There are some changes that… by mike320
Thanks. How does the RC version differ from the nightly builds, such as the latest 2.2 one released on the 19th? Is it potential more stable?
In reply to Thanks. How does the RC… by Sambaji
Nightlies released since the RC was announced might have a known crash fixed. The 2.2 nightlies have always been very stable, unlike the master nightlies which may have partially implemented features and can be expected to crash. lasconic decided it's time to release a new update and designated the RC to be the basis upon which it will be released. Each build has some change from the previous. lasconic ultimately decides which "fixes" end up in the final 2.2 release. There are several of these "fixes" that have not been incorporated into any nightly yet.
In reply to Thanks. How does the RC… by Sambaji
To expand on the above:
An RC is kind of a trial balloon, if we don't find any problems, we'll release this as is. Probably in most similar projects, something is found and fixed. Sometimes new problems that weren't in the previous release, sometimes old ones that just hadn't quite made the cut for fixing before the RC suddenly seem important enough. I think that's what happened here. If you're ever really curious, you can check the "commit log" on GitHub, where the MuseScore source code lives. Here it is:
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/commits/2.2
As of when I am writing this, I see about half a dozen commits since the RC. Often the commit message is self-explanatory - something about fixing a particular bug. Others are more about housekeeping don't really indicate a user-visible change. Right now I see just a couple of bug fixes, one having to do with font kerning (spacing between characters), another with the size of tuplet numbers when generating parts, both of which are long-standing issues that I'm glad to see finally addressed. Another change about playback while editing on a tab staff that I don't really know anything about offhand but seems harmless enough.
In reply to To expand on the above:… by Marc Sabatella
Thanks for the detailed explanation everyone. Great Work.
In reply to Thanks for the detailed… by Sambaji
Yeah... Nice to meet You. Welcome in "the team of people working for free" :D
Great! Well done all.
Thanks again.