Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:04 -0400 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 3:43 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 15:23 -0400 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 2:38 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 14:23 -0400 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > [...] > > > > It might be worth holding off this level of automation for a bit. > > > > > > Why? It’s common and (in the general case) easy to do with modern CI/CD > > > infrastructure. Besides, if we don’t do it, then the 64-bit Mac builds > > > will be less generally available, and that will negate the point of all > > > my work on them. > > > > I'm not saying that you shouldn't upload it (even though it kind of > > feels like a third party package right now). > > How does it feel like a third-party package? I'm basically duplicating the > structure of the official 32-bit Mac builds, except that I'm not using GUB.
Exactly, precisely what I said. > > > Besides how often do you > > expect rebuilds for each release? That's hopefully one binary package > > per LilyPond release, right? > > At least. Ideally I'd like to also make available a "bleeding-edge" .app > build, either nightly or for each commit accepted into master. But that's > less important than making builds available for each release, of course. > > > > > > > Or are you suggesting another way to make the builds generally available? > > > If so, what? Right now I’m manually uploading them to Bintray, which > > > isn’t sustainable (although I *could* automate that through their API). > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > hope we can switch all platforms away from GUB, > > > > > > I do too. It’s a good idea in theory, but *way* too complicated. > > Clarification: I meant that *GUB* is way too complicated. I would like to > switch to a simpler build method. > > No, it works: https://github.com/hahnjo/lilypond-binaries/ > > What is that? It has no description or README, and I cannot easily tell what > it is meant to do. "There hasn't been a thread on lilypond-devel about this yet because I'm waiting for 2.21.0 which we'll do with GUB." > > > And unless proven wrong, I think this will also work for macOS (given a > > few tweaks). > > We *already* have something working for macOS, as I've made clear on this > list. See https://bintray.com/marnen/lilypond-darwin-64 and > http://gitlab.com/marnen/lilypond-mac-builder ;. If you think my work can be > improved by yours, or vice versa, pull requests are welcome! Yes, I think it can be improved: There should not be separate ways to build release binaries for each platform. I suggested that we collaborate back in January. Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
