Re: critical issues

[Phil Holmes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 7:55 AM
Subject: Re: critical issues


> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 01:03:08AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
> > >
> > > > We could certainly consider dropping support for OSX or windows.
> > >
> > > That sort of token solidarity is actually counterproductive:
> > > if you believe that non-releases lead to non-users,
> >
> > yes
> >
> > > and you think that
> > > non-releases for GNU/Linux may pressure GNU/Linux developers into making
> > > OSX/Windows releases,
> >
> > no
> >
> > > then how does a non-release for GNU/Linux, with
> > > its corresponding result in decreasing GNU/Linux users and GNU/Linux
> > > developers, help in recruiting GNU/Linux developers that can be
> > > pressured into making OSX and Windows releases?
> >
> > it doesn't?
>
> Exactly.
>
> > Suppose we announce a big new shiny lilypond 2.16.  For linux and
> > freebsd only.  OSX and windows users can go screw themselves.
>
> We are not announcing a big new shiny Lilypond 2.16.  We are announcing
> big new shiny 2.15.xx "developer" releases one after another.  For
> GNU/Linux and FreeBSD only.

Noooo.  I'm happily running pretty much every 2.15 version on my Windows 
box.  It runs fine and it's my normal music-producing environment, and also 
the one on which I test for bugs and get examples to add to the tracker. 
AFAIK the only problem is with lilypond-book, which I personally don't run 
on my windows machine.

> OSX and Windows users _are_ second class (or handicapped) citizens for
> LilyPond because the whole technology is based on GNU, and since the
> developer skills needed to work with it strongly correlate with
> UNIX-like systems.  The whole point of GUB is that it is a _cross_
> building ennvironment that can be maintained by GNU/Linux developers for
> the sake of OSX and Windows users.  The skill level for actively keeping
> GUB working (rather than plug and pray) is considerable, and requires
> good GNU/Linux (or at least UNIX) skills and at least contact skills
> with OSX and Windows.  Without a healthy surplus of GNU/Linux-based
> developers that are not already locked down with keeping up their own
> projects, our OSX and Windows users can indeed, as you so flowery put
> it, can go screw themselves because they can't hope to screw with
> LilyPond, rather pure UNIX-based technology requiring UNIX-centric skill
> sets and mind frames.
>
> 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.

> > - 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.


--
Phil Holmes