Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> writes:
> On 24/09/13 14:09, David Kastrup wrote:
>> You _are_ aware that the _majority_ of current contributors is running
>> Windows?
>>
>> Try setting up a native development environment for LilyPond on
>> Windows. Come back when you are done.
>
> What is the reason for it being so difficult?
What about "Try it" did you not understand? Windows does not just allow
you to say
sudo apt-get build-dep lilypond
Instead you have several dozens of dependencies you have to satisfy by
hand, and then the fun with registry entries and other stuff starts.
So please: stop the cheap pontification until you actually know what you
are talking about.
>>> and the risk is that users are failed because developers weren't
>>> aware of the needs and requirements in cases outside their own
>>> setup.
>>
>> Please compare LilyPond's track record to that of _any_ other project
>> delivering binaries for Linux, FreeBSD, MacOSX (PowerPPC _and_ Intel,
>> I might add) and Windows. We make a working development release
>> every 2 weeks for all platforms.
>>
>> Which other project does that? Can you please get more specific
>> about how we are failing our users here?
>
> Well, there could be a point of view that the fact that you can't set
> up a native dev environment on Windows is a pretty serious design
> failure.
No doubt about that, but we're not in the situation to fix Windows.
> But the point wasn't that Lilypond is specifically failing on some
> particular point, the point was that by not designing to enable easy
> development and contribution access across multiple platforms, you
> wind up with a situation where the contributor base is constrained to
> those who can cope with your restrictions.
Look, before you have experience _maintaining_ a cross-platform software
project, stop the pontification. At my last regular job, we had a
publishing project with a TeX core and Java control logic and some
scripting/packaging. All cross-platform technology, so we decided to
offer a Windows version because everybody wants Windows and how hard can
it be. A few man-years later (as there were several people working on
it), we had the thing working. Deployments? Some. Eventually replaced
by virtual machines running GNU/Linux since they were far more robust
and unproblematic.
LilyPond is doing _amazingly_ well. At least we deliver working
packages that run on Windows. If you think that a development
environment running under Windows for LilyPond makes any sense, I have
the strong impression that you have no experience whatsoever what you
are talking about.
Pretty thinking gets us only so far.
>>> I found the git-cl experience absolutely inexplicable given that at
>>> the time not only was GitHub offering the service it did, but
>>> similar experiences were available via Bitbucket, Launchpad and
>>> Gitorious.
>>
>> They don't offer command line interfaces into issue trackers, do they?
>
> Off the top of my head, I don't know. Why does that matter? The
> web-browser-based tools are much more user-friendly.
git-cl does nothing that you can't do directly in the web browser, so
why don't you use the web browser directly? Saves you complaining about
git-cl. Do it for a few weeks of serious work, and you'll be glad
git-cl saves you most of the typery/clickery.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
