Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> 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 least sort of a roadmap.
My take is the following: a) for the precompiled LilyPond versions, foregoing Guile-1.8 is not a sensible option at the moment. We need to provide something working well. If I remember correctly, we don't need to fork yet, right? b) We want the guile-2-patches in master (with suitable guards/wrappers so that Guile-1.8 keeps working). If possible and feasible, in a working state for both 2.0 and 2.2. If not possible/feasible, focusing on Guile 2.2. We are spread thin enough with porting work as we are, and it does appear like Guile 2.2 is not going to end up as a dead-end version, at least in comparison to Guile 2.0. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
