Kevin Barry <barr...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> >> Frankly, I am more sympathetic to "worksforme" discussions among >> developers than telling users "worksforme". Where is the point in being >> able to tell users that no developer will reproduce their problem? >> >> I'd rather have an error popping up for at least some developers than >> for none. >> > > This sounds like you are saying it's better for the situation to be a mess > for developers so that they can better help users deal with the same mess, > therefore we should leave things as they are.
I say that having a developer monoculture doesn't buy as anything since we still need to provide for a multitude of users. > Installing docker and building an image is much easier than setting up > a working build environment for LilyPond now. Get a LilyPond source .deb and do sudo apt build-deps on it. Afterwards you have a working build environment. > I think it would be a win for both devs and users. I don't really see the underlying logic. Users should consider it a win when the developers state "you are no longer allowed to run LilyPond natively, get a docker container", and you want to convince developers to stop using and developing LilyPond natively on their systems because it will be so much easier to maintain a virtual layer in between? We have had the LilyDev VM for a long time now. It has seen some use, but not overwhelmingly much, and the reasons for that are pretty much the same for newer virtualisation methods. -- David Kastrup
