Re: critical issues

[David Kastrup]

James <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> On 3 January 2012 12:53, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> If we refuse thinking about stable releases by taking GUB as an
>>>> excuse, the grand next stable release that will benefit users of
>>>> many operating systems is likely to fall in the class "too little,
>>>> too late".
>>>
>>> I second David.  Given that we develop within a GNU environment, bugs
>>> specific to Windows and Mac shouldn't prevent stable releases.  I can
>>> even imagine that well announced release candidates for a new stable
>>> version attracts developers to help fix issues with problematic
>>> platforms.
>>
>> From a support perspective, not releasing the windows and mac versions
>> at the same time is problematic.  Many questions and bugreports that
>> could be answered with "upgrade to the latest version" all of a sudden
>> start depending on the platform that the user is using.
>
> Yes, Han-Wen beat me to that point.
>
> So if 2.14 works on OSX but 2.16 doesn't then the user has no choice
> but to stick with 2.14 or use a 2.15 branch both which are no no
> longer being developed.

Newsflash: 2.16 does not work on OSX.  Nor does it work on any other
platform.  The user has no choice but to stick with 2.14 or use a 2.15
branch which does not apparently work on OSX.

> That is a pain to troubleshoot
>
> There is some wonderful work gone into 2.15 that isn't (and never will
> be in 2.14) that the user-base will miss out on.

Newsflash: it is already missing out.

> As a side note, I came to LP via MacOS X + Lilypad, and ran with
> windows only because it is my OS at work. Now I use Linux for all my
> LP work and LilyDev in a VM for Dev and doc work (so LilyPond-Book is
> not a problem for me and having LilyDev in a VM even if it is in a
> Linux OS itself - allows me to use VBox's snapshot for testing or
> reverting when I run into git issues or build issues), in fact my
> Windows LP work is virtually nil now, unless a user or dev asks for
> some second verification.

This does not exactly make a strong point about the ability of Windows
to attract development.

> My question to David, because I am not getting where the 'ire' is
> coming from, why do you care if we release dev after dev release vs
> stable?

<URL:http://xkcd.com/386/>

If we look beyond that personality trait, I have a financial interest in
LilyPond becoming a package attractive to people with more money than
programming skills.  A stable release for which the stability and
usability aim is more than just "mostly works on OSX and Windows" would
be helpful to point to.

-- 
David Kastrup