Comment #32 on issue 1933 by [email protected]: Lilypond-book requires
msvcrt again
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1933
I completely agree with what you're saying in post 30
I wasn't clear in my previous post: when I said "we are maintaining a
feature for which we have no current developer who is an expert", it was in
light of the "I'm having trouble imaging that the worth of a packaged
Python is greater than or equal to the worth of spending developer
resources on understanding it and fixing it every time something goes
wrong," I didn't mean to imply that the absence of an expert should be a
sole criteria upon which the maintenance of something is based, but rather
that it should be part of a calculation that allows us to evaluate the
utility of that feature.
So, in summary:
Having binary releases is very important, and the lack of an expert in that
domain should not be cause for our deciding to scrap that goal (this is
what Han-Wen said in a recent e-mail).
Packaging Python with LilyPond when Python is downloadable from a website
seems less important and thus the lack of developer resources may weigh out
the utility of including it.
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
