Re: Release schedule for 2.20

>> What about setting up GUB (with LilyPond) on >> https://hydra.nixos.org/? Other GNU projects like Emacs are also >> hosted there for daily builds, so it should be easy to get lilypond >> registered there... >> >> https://nixos.org/hydra/ > > Are you going to do it? Basically, I'm

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Werner LEMBERG writes: > What about setting up GUB (with LilyPond) on https://hydra.nixos.org/? > Other GNU projects like Emacs are also hosted there for daily > builds, so it should be easy to get lilypond registered there... > > https://nixos.org/hydra/ Are you going to do it?

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

> On my GUB build machine (4 core hyperthreaded i7, 8 Gigs, SSD) an > incremental build (i.e. with a stable version of GUB with the > toolset all up to date) takes around one to one and a half hours. > If GUB needs updating, it can, as you say, take over 6 hours even on > that machine. The

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Am 09.05.2018 um 17:23 schrieb Phil Holmes: Question: How difficult/costly/... would it be to prepare a "daily build from current master" for download? Very.  We are talking about 6 hours of build time on a pretty solidly powered 8-processor machine.  Actually, we _were_ talking about that

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

- Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> To: "Lukas-Fabian Moser" <l...@gmx.de> Cc: "lilypond-user" <lilypond-user@gnu.org>; <lilypond-de...@gnu.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2018 4:11 PM Subject: Re: Release schedu

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Lukas-Fabian Moser writes: > (I, for example, just recently switched to self-compiled Lilypond > because of Malte's amazing work on the \haydnTurn which was prompted > by my question. To my surprise, compiling turned out to be quite easy, > but of course there /were /some slight

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

- Original Message - From: "Lukas-Fabian Moser" <l...@gmx.de> To: <lilypond-de...@gnu.org>; "lilypond-user" <lilypond-user@gnu.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2018 3:09 PM Subject: Re: Release schedule for 2.20 But an increasing number of questio

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

But an increasing number of questions asked in forums or on the lists can be answered by “compile current master or wait for 2.21.0”. And a huge number of answers requires at least 2.19.xx but people understandably don’t want to install an “unstable” version. IIUC, the situation used to be:

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Am 9. Mai 2018 12:18:37 MESZ schrieb Aaron Hill : >On 2018-05-09 02:49, Malte Meyn wrote: >> But an increasing number of questions asked in forums or on the lists >> can be answered by “compile current master or wait for 2.21.0”. And a >> huge number of answers requires

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

On 2018-05-09 02:49, Malte Meyn wrote: But an increasing number of questions asked in forums or on the lists can be answered by “compile current master or wait for 2.21.0”. And a huge number of answers requires at least 2.19.xx but people understandably don’t want to install an “unstable”

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Am 09.05.2018 um 11:16 schrieb David Kastrup: Aaron Hill writes: Hi folks, It would seem the release of version 2.20 must be nearing, but I have not found anything published about the release schedule for the project. There isn't one. [CC-ing to

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

- Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> To: "Aaron Hill" <lilyp...@hillvisions.com> Cc: <lilypond-user@gnu.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2018 10:16 AM Subject: Re: Release schedule for 2.20 Aaron Hill <lilyp...@hillvision

Re: Release schedule for 2.20

Aaron Hill writes: > Hi folks, > > It would seem the release of version 2.20 must be nearing, but I have > not found anything published about the release schedule for the > project. There isn't one. > The website mentions following the info-lilyp...@gnu.org mailing

Release schedule for 2.20

Hi folks, It would seem the release of version 2.20 must be nearing, but I have not found anything published about the release schedule for the project. The website mentions following the info-lilyp...@gnu.org mailing list, but according to the archives that list hasn't seen a post in years.