Re: Address output-distance problems: (issue 563730043 by address@hidden)

[David Kastrup]

Kevin Barry <address@hidden> writes:

>>
>>
>> Frankly, I am more sympathetic to "worksforme" discussions among
>> developers than telling users "worksforme".  Where is the point in being
>> able to tell users that no developer will reproduce their problem?
>>
>> I'd rather have an error popping up for at least some developers than
>> for none.
>>
>
> This sounds like you are saying it's better for the situation to be a mess
> for developers so that they can better help users deal with the same mess,
> therefore we should leave things as they are.

I say that having a developer monoculture doesn't buy as anything since
we still need to provide for a multitude of users.

> Installing docker and building an image is much easier than setting up
> a working build environment for LilyPond now.

Get a LilyPond source .deb and do sudo apt build-deps on it.  Afterwards
you have a working build environment.

> I think it would be a win for both devs and users.

I don't really see the underlying logic.  Users should consider it a win
when the developers state "you are no longer allowed to run LilyPond
natively, get a docker container", and you want to convince developers
to stop using and developing LilyPond natively on their systems because
it will be so much easier to maintain a virtual layer in between?

We have had the LilyDev VM for a long time now.  It has seen some use,
but not overwhelmingly much, and the reasons for that are pretty much
the same for newer virtualisation methods.

-- 
David Kastrup