Re: Upgrading Python - why not bundle official 2.7 binaries?

[address@hidden]

On 20 déc. 2012, at 08:36, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> wrote:

> Ben Rudiak-Gould writes:
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:43 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> "address@hidden" <address@hidden> writes:
>>>> ...it seems like the
>>>> question is why we don't download the binaries directly and bundle
>>>> them with LilyPond.
>>> 
>>> Because then all bets are off concerning comparable results.
>> 
>> Not if you bundled the same release version of the binaries on every
>> platform. I do understand the problem
> 
> Your thoughts are valid and I appreciate your concern.  I don't reall
> see a problem as such.  What we have done is create a fully automated
> system for producing all LilyPond binaries in one go.  It's called GUB.
> 
> It gets the job done and even works nicely, most of the time.  We made
> some choices in GUB, for good or for bad.  If you have good ideas of
> how to improve things, try it and send a patch.  If it looks clean and
> is an obvious improvement, chances are it will be used.
> 
> Greetings,
> Jan

I'll chime in saying that all the mechanisms exist already in GUB to download 
and bundle things with LilyPond, so one can use GUB to directly download and 
package binaries. Whether or not to do this is up to you - I was for it a year 
or so ago but people seemed not to keen with it at the time.  I completely 
agree with Ben that the annoyance of receiving bug reports that should be going 
to Python will be way outweighed by more up-to-date python and a potentially 
more stable build (Python likely has more volunteers working on making stable 
Python releases than we do).

So if you wanna modify GUB, download it and do a multi-platform build of 
LilyPond once.  It took me a day of coding, cursing, and zen yoga to make it to 
the end zone.  But after that it's fairly self explanatory (it's really well 
written - all in Python - and easy to understand) and you can propose patches 
to it.

Cheers,
MS