Re: critical issues

[Phil Holmes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: critical issues


> "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
> > To: <address@hidden>
> >
> > > There is a _reason_ the remaining OSX and Windows based developers
> > > are doing (definitely important) documentation and web site work.
> > > They are to a large degree locked out and dependent on support from
> > > surplus GNU/Linux-based developer capacities.  We are not doing them
> > > any favors by killing LilyPond development as a whole out of sympathy
> > > with their plight.
> >
> > Not at all.  I think you know that myself and James are mainly Windows
> > users.  We also run big Ubuntu machines that support the build
> > environment. However, we came to the development from being Windows
> > users.  Cut off that supply and I'll probably stop supporting Lily,
> > which I would regret.
>
> You are compiling your own binaries without using GNU/Linux in the
> process?
>
> That's what a native development environment would look like.

No.  I have an Ubuntu VM which I use for quick experiments and a very fast 
Ubuntu PC which I use for full builds.  But I support lilypond because I 
_use_ it for typesetting music on a _Windows_ machine. Take away that 
ability to use it, and the sesire to support goes away.

> > > > - what does this do to our ONLY documentation writers and
> > > >   reviewers (who are all windows-based)?  Will they be a) more
> > > >   motivated to work on lilypond, b) no change, or c) less
> > > >   motivated?
> > >
> > > We are already screwing them over with GNU/Linux-only "developer
> > > releases".  When will we stop using our Windows and OSX developers as
> > > an excuse for not working on a stable release that would actually
> > > warrant the effort of getting GUB working again and matched to
> > > current Windows and OSX releases?
> >
> > Not true - see above.
>
> Documentation and web writing without a functional lilypond-book strikes
> me as somewhat difficult.

I don't use lilypond-book for day-day activity - only lilypond development.

> It is nice that things are not as completely broken as I thought.  But I
> still think that our effectively current philosophy of "the next stable
> release is something only developers interested in Windows and OSX need
> to concern themselves with" is doing anybody a favor.  Our road map has
> nothing to offer beyond GUB, and so there is little interest in getting
> even there.

I think you've mis-stated the philosophy.  It's "the next stable release is 
something that will benefit users of many operating systems, including many 
flavours of Unix, plus windows and MAC".

--
Phil Holmes