"[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes: > On 19 déc. 2012, at 10:18, David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ben Rudiak-Gould <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> On Windows and OS X, I mean; on Linux and FreeBSD I think you could >>> just demand installation of the appropriate packages. >>> >>> I don't understand what's so unusual about LilyPond's use of Python >>> that it requires a custom build. >> >> Nothing unusual. Neither is there anything unusual about LilyPond's use >> of Ghostscript. Or GUILE. Or the Bourne shell. Or about half a dozen >> other dependencies. >> >> Leave all of them out from our LilyPond distribution, and the user base >> on Windows will drop to 5%, while the number of bug reports stays about >> the same. > > I don't think Ben's suggesting to leave them out...it seems like the > question is why we don't download the binaries directly and bundle > them with LilyPond. That'd save having to compile them from source.
Because then all bets are off concerning comparable results. We distribute for platforms which no developer really has available. If we include unknown code, the resulting problems can't be traced back to anything under our control. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
