Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes: > 2016-04-23 11:35 GMT+02:00 Andrew Bernard <andrew.bern...@gmail.com>: >> Pardon my ignorance but why do you want to support a common subset? >> For what purpose? The whole point of Python 3 is that it breaks 2 in >> order to become a superior and more consistent langauge. It’s been >> out since 2008, an eternity in IT terms. Please help me understand. >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> >> >> On 23/04/2016, 6:33 PM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> >>>Well, unless there are really compelling reasons otherwise, sticking >>>with a common subset (namely making it work with Python 3 while keeping >>>it working with Python 2) would seem like the sanest option. > > > As a side-note, midi2ly needs our shipped python-version. It stopps > working even with my system-python, i.e. 2.7.9. > Not sure, whether this requires a bugreport, because there is no bug > with lily's python...
In my opinion it does. At least unless the problem consists in missing libraries. Then it may need mentioning in the dependencies (unless already listed there), and it may be worth checking that system packagings of LilyPond also have the requisite dependencies. But if there is a bona-fide language version problem with midi2ly, of course it's a bug. Our prepackaged binaries are a service and convenience for LilyPond users, but "the" LilyPond is just the source code. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
