On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 06:44:51PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Graham, you wrote Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:48 PM > > >Completely agreed! I've taken a stab at this with the "stamp of > >approval" concept of a release -- please take a look at the > >updated GOP-PROP 8...(probable decision) and let me know what you > >think. > > Well, OK, it's a better point, if a little contrived :) I can live > with it, though. > Let's move on.
Well, it's not /entirely/ contrived. I mean, Janek wants us to use fontforge 20110222 or higher; I want to say "no way until lilydev has that version of fontforged installed". And if we ever did push such a change without lilydev being updated, I certainly wouldn't want to make a new stable release before fixing that! We haven't had many build-dependency updates in the past few years, but before that we used to require really cutting-edge libraries. I'm not opposed to requiring new libraries, and I don't care if it's something that no linux distro includes -- as long as we have a customized, downloadable, lilydev iso image available. (I could argue that anything less would be a "regression", i.e. "I used to be able to contribute to development, but because of changes to git master I can no longer do so". However, I'd rather make this particular case of "regression" explicit.) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
