[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Perception of LilyPond development status
From: |
Jacques Menu |
Subject: |
Re: Perception of LilyPond development status |
Date: |
Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:21:19 +0100 |
Hello David,
Maybe this is totally stupid, but would it be meaningful to pick a Guile 2
version, fix the issues in string
implementation and design, and freeze that fixed version for Lily’s own use,
without depending on Andy Wingo’s work for some time?
JM
> Le 14 déc. 2019 à 22:58, David Kastrup <address@hidden> a écrit :
>
> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Any LilyPond dev who does have a Facebook account might have a look at
>> this interesting, although somewhat sad, discussion. I think it gives
>> a clear picture of how our current state of development is perceived
>> by users:
>>
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/gnulilypond/permalink/10157762793383529/
>
> The problem with the "obsolete version of Guile" is that Guile
> development is falling apart. The only person actually working on the
> development version of Guile is Andy Wingo. He does not participate on
> the Guile developer list, he does not bother with bug reports, he does
> not take input and does whatever he currently is interested in without
> communicating it, and frequently breaking master. What he is interested
> in is basically compiler/optimization development. He is not interested
> in fixing the performance and design problems with Guile 2+'s string
> implementation and design. There are about a dozen developers (probably
> less by now) cleaning up on the stable branch, but they cannot do
> significant independent development since they cannot coordinate with
> the development version.
>
> This has been the case for 2.2, and it's more so for 2.3. I don't see
> that there is a viable way for LilyPond to move forward to "current"
> versions of Guile which have become completely unpredictable as a target
> as well as as a platform. I think there will not be much of a way
> around forking 1.8 and making that work for us as long as no
> well-performing string-interface is available that would efficiently
> facilitate the C/Scheme string passing density of LilyPond.
>
> Maybe we can coordinate something with Thien-Thi Nguyen who has been
> keeping the Guile-1.8 branch tip in the official Guile repository from
> bitrot due to Texinfo and language changes.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>