Hi all,
guile-2.2 is released. So I plan to implement most patches from the
remotes/origin/dev/guile-v2-work-branch and those I've put locally on
top of it.
This will sometimes require some updating of those patches. Most of
them were created to make lily work with guile-2.0.x. Also, I'd like
to
2017-03-19 15:11 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley :
> For example the attached.
Just found some bads in it, mostly c/p-errors. Not shrinking the
functionality, though. Already corrected locally.
Cheers,
Harm
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu
Thomas Morley writes:
> Hi all,
>
> guile-2.2 is released. So I plan to implement most patches from the
> remotes/origin/dev/guile-v2-work-branch and those I've put locally on
> top of it.
>
> This will sometimes require some updating of those patches. Most of
> them were created to make lily wor
Am 19.03.2017 um 15:43 schrieb David Kastrup:
> The problem is more that Guile-2.0 will not work at all any more, and it
> will take some time until Guile-2.2 becomes generally available. Now
> it's not like compilation with Guile-2.0 is doing us a lot of favors
> anyway.
I think that's what Ha
2017-03-19 15:59 GMT+01:00 Urs Liska :
>
>
> Am 19.03.2017 um 15:43 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> The problem is more that Guile-2.0 will not work at all any more, and it
>> will take some time until Guile-2.2 becomes generally available. Now
>> it's not like compilation with Guile-2.0 is doing us a l
Thomas Morley writes:
> But back to the initial question.
>
> Possibilities:
> (1) I could try to revise the guile2-patches and implement them in master.
> (2) Doing the same but placing them in a new public branch for guile-2.2
> (3) We could fork guile-1.8.
>
> I think we need a consensus or at
2017-03-19 18:05 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup :
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
>> But back to the initial question.
>>
>> Possibilities:
>> (1) I could try to revise the guile2-patches and implement them in master.
>> (2) Doing the same but placing them in a new public branch for guile-2.2
>> (3) We could f
