Andrew Bernard <andrew.bern...@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi All, > > I am new to lilypond dev. work. My intention may be naive, but I am wanting > to do the work to uplift gub and lilypond to python 3. Am I premature, or > foolish, or misguided? I did have some encouraging email about this > previously, but I just wanted to check before I dive in and spend large > amounts of time, especially re GUB. I have yesterday asked Masamichi-san to take a look at our current GUB problems but it would appear that Werner found and fixed the source of the current roadblock. Now it sounded like Masamichi-san was currently rather short of time for this, so it would make sense that now, since the immediate problem appears to be solved, you take a look at this instead with a perspective of a Python 3 migration eventually. So I did some "git blame" searching and it would appear that the Python 2.5 "ism" was introduced with commit commit 7b07440da921d979ab492fd284b6198152a8020c Author: Alexander Myltsev <a.mylt...@gmail.com> AuthorDate: Thu Jun 2 11:19:07 2016 +0300 Commit: James Lowe <pkx1...@runbox.com> CommitDate: Sat Jun 16 10:59:08 2018 +0100 musicxml2ly: handle hidden time signatures. Now I don't really feel that we can indeed pass any blame for not being aware of having to use syntax for an ancient rather than an antique version of Python. And we apparently don't have the manpower in place to figure out what went wrong: this put our release process to a halt for almost half a year. So it would be really _urgent_ to get GUB advanced to a recent version of Python 2 in all supported platforms (and I think we can delist the PPC platform support by now): the current Python 2 requirement is obvious, the Python 2.4 requirement not. Moving to a current Python 2 version should be doable without changing the LilyPond source code: that's a pure GUB job, though one that might be bothersome on some platforms. Decommissioning the PPC platforms would likely make this easier, and I don't think we really have active users there. Masamichi-san also suggested stopping FreeBSD support (I don't know if there is much of an indication the binary installation from us is used rather than compiling themselves, and supposedly they can run Linux binaries though the runtime environment may be troublesome) and Windows 32-bit support. I am not sure whether there aren't people running 32-bit Windows binaries in VMs though. But at least PPC seems reasonably safe to retire, and possibly FreeBSD if it helps. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel