Le 25/02/2022 à 08:41, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
Le 25/02/2022 à 08:18, Jonas Hahnfeld a écrit :
If so, that clears my concerns.
Just to be sure, can you be more precise here? Does it also clear the
concerns about entirely dropping the code for Guile 1.8?
If it turns out to work on
Le 25/02/2022 à 08:18, Jonas Hahnfeld a écrit :
If so, that clears my concerns.
Just to be sure, can you be more precise here? Does it also clear the
concerns about entirely dropping the code for Guile 1.8?
If it turns out to work on Windows, it clears that
category of concern, yes. The
Am Freitag, dem 25.02.2022 um 00:08 +0100 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> > > I read over this thread, but I don't understand what you mean by
> > > "downstreams" here.
> >
> > In my understanding, it's about "downstreams" packaging LilyPond,
> > including Linux distributions and parties like HomeBrew
[Han-Wen]
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 12:05 PM Jean Abou Samra wrote:
Friends,
I don't see this thread coming to a conclusion if it stays between the same
three people, and the topic is somewhat important to LilyPond's future. More
voices would be helpful.
Here are my thoughts:
Thanks for
[There is much to reply to so I'll make several emails.]
Hi Luca,
Le 24/02/2022 à 09:13, Luca Fascione a écrit :
In case it's useful, I'll share my impressions as a recent addition to
this group.
I have some experience with rolling out software, gathered in a
different field.
Where I come
Am Donnerstag, dem 24.02.2022 um 18:25 +0100 schrieb Luca Fascione:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 5:44 PM Jonas Hahnfeld
> wrote:
> > I will not reply to most of your message; I suspect that your
> > experience comes from a corporate environment where people are paid
> > full time to work on
Jonas Hahnfeld via Discussions on LilyPond development
writes:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 24.02.2022 um 09:13 +0100 schrieb Luca Fascione:
>> Last thought: as I am currently learning Scheme and Guile, and I
>> noticed 3.0.x has been out for a couple years now and seems to be
>> benchmarking with
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 5:44 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> I will not reply to most of your message; I suspect that your
> experience comes from a corporate environment where people are paid
> full time to work on software.
It does, yes.
> In my opinion, many of the points are
> simply not
On 2/24/22, 9:03 AM, "Werner LEMBERG" wrote:
> I believe that these pdf documents are a significant improvement. I
> love them.
Good to hear, thanks.
> I do not see the need to use the syntax highlighting in the text
> references. In fact, I think the
Hi,
I will not reply to most of your message; I suspect that your
experience comes from a corporate environment where people are paid
full time to work on software. In my opinion, many of the points are
simply not relevant in a relatively small community of volunteers, for
example the release
> I believe that these pdf documents are a significant improvement. I
> love them.
Good to hear, thanks.
> I do not see the need to use the syntax highlighting in the text
> references. In fact, I think the syntax highlighting in the text
> references would get in the way.
Could you explain
In case it's useful, I'll share my impressions as a recent addition to this
group.
I have some experience with rolling out software, gathered in a different
field.
Where I come from we release often (I think we've averaged in the 30+ cuts
per year, roughly 2 every 3 weeks), and our users have
12 matches
Mail list logo
