lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Improving the Contributors Guide and LilyDev


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Improving the Contributors Guide and LilyDev
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 00:24:28 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Wols Lists <address@hidden> writes:

> On 04/05/15 04:02, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>> 2. Compiling with LilyDev (2.3) and Compiling (4.x)
>> 2.3 is about getting it set up with LilyDev.  4.x is about general work
>> whether with or without LilyDev.  We are much stronger about recommending
>> the use of LilyDev than we were when the CG was originally written, so
>> perhaps it's time to make a change here.
>> 
> Am I right here? Is lilydev a debian-based virtual machine. I absolutely
> DO NOT get on with Debian based distros. SuSE and gentoo are my thing,
> I've tried Debian, Mint, Ubuntu, dunno what else ... if it's
> debian-based I hated it. I don't know why, I didn't get on with Red Hat
> either, despite SuSE and RH being rpm-based.
>
> (Actually, I started using gentoo, because the latest SuSE was not
> sufficiently up-to-date to compile a development copy of lilypond! :-)
>
> But anyways, the main point of this email is to point out that pushing
> debian could cost you developers - I don't know how many people like me
> there are out there,

Judging from the success of Ubuntu, not a majority.  The package system
of Debian is mature, reliable and flexible and has been so for quite
long.  You stand a good chance of being able to use Debian-based
packages on a number of Debian-based distributions even outside of
"Ubuntu remixes".

Exchanging packages between two RPM-based distributions like SuSE and
RedHat is not likely to work.  So with RPM, you are catering for only
one of several minority systems.

> but if I have to use a debian-based system my reaction is likely to be
> "thanks but no thanks". (That said, I think a ready-prepped virtual
> machine is a very good idea, just don't assume "one size fits all")

The whole point of a ready-prepped virtual machine is to provide a
shrink-wrapped "one size" solution for people not into special
solutions, particularly users without a GNU/Linux background not wanting
to set up and maintain a native system.  If you have more special
desires, the source is there perfectly well.  There is little point in
catering for people like you who will set up their own system anyway.

I myself have never used a virtual system for development.  It never was
any problem for me: it would be more of a hassle for me to set up
virtual environments.

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]