Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Thomas Morley]

2017-01-07 10:57 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian
>>> stable (in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla
>>> Debian testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are
>>> too old to run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.  Now
>>> that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
>>> LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
>>> anymore :-(
>>>
>>> For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
>>> releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...
>>
>> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
>> Have you tried that already?
>>
>> Maybe we have to bite the bullet and distribute guile 1.8 together
>> with lilypond.  I know that this is a step into the wrong direction
>> since it doesn't force the guile maintainers to improve guile 2.x so
>> that lilypond can use it...
>
> The Guile maintainers are not interested in improving Guile 2.x so that
> LilyPond can use it.
>
> I'm no longer involved in LilyPond management, and others aren't yet
> banned from posting messages on Guile-devel, so ignoring them will take
> more than semi-annual lip service in private mail to RMS without any
> followup actions.
>
> I think it would be reasonable to figure out how to keep the Guile
> developer lists regularly informed of current problems, of the
> comparative performance issues, and of the necessity to revert to an
> older Guile version (possibly creating a fork in order to get a few more
> problems fixed) because Guile-2.x is
>
> a) developing in a direction making it less rather than more suited as
> an extension language
> b) not bothering at all about keeping their invested users on-board
>
> Now obviously I am not all too well-suited as a role model for
> communicating with Guile upstream.  I'm just not the kind of man Stephen
> Turnbull is (who has more or less single-handedly deflated the animosity
> towards GNU in XEmacs, while having had more than enough personal
> setbacks to keep it going.  And RMS has not really been the greatest
> help in that endeavor).
>
> But either way, I don't see that the project can do without
> communicating with Guile, and better than I managed doing.  Even if we
> end up forking Guile 1, we want to do so in a manner where incremental
> improvements of Guile developers remain feasible/possible.
>
> --
> David Kastrup


You probably know about
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2016-11/msg00031.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-12/msg00041.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-01/msg00003.html

Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
pretty much frustrated.
I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
guile entirely.

Cheers,
  Harm