Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 08:33:45AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> I don't do Python or many newfangled languages. I have worked with Make >> for over 20 years. The casual contributor will be one used to the >> technology and thinking underlying Lilypond. More likely than not >> someone with more than a trace of free software project experience in >> them. > > You are incorrect on this point.
[...] > Yes, various expert FLOSS members (such as Reinhold, Carl, and > IIRC yourself) have stepped forward to fix a few things in the > builds -- but the only people who are "working" on the build > system "full time" are windows users. > (that said, Phil recently bought a fast computer so that he can > make builds faster and thus experiment more easily) Uh, you changed topic. The topic was "the casual contributor", not "working fulltime". I was talking about those people who _don't_ focus on the build system because they prefer contributing elsewhere. And I was saying that turning the build system into something that only experts in the build system can handle is a bad idea. A contorted system using autogenerated Makefiles is that. But a system written and maintained in Python is that as well. In my opinion, jumping to yet-another-system instead of cleaning up the current system is a step backwards, unless one can prove that the current system can't provide the required functionality without exceeding reasonable complexity, and a new system can. > Don't tell me that experienced hackers will take care of the build > system. They aren't. Changing the build system to something where they have a plausible reason not to take care is not going to improve matters. Even full-time contributors come and go eventually. A build system that is only accessible to those who have left already is not going to help. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
