Re: Guile 3.0

[Luca Fascione]

On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 8:02 PM David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

> What do you mean with "shipped"?


I mean that when you clone the lilypond repo you'd find one more directory,
say
guile-2.2.7+/
or
guile-3.0.8+/
or something like that.
In fact we'd likely end up compiling a slightly different version thereof,
as I was saying,
because we'd apply a patch or two before building


> I don't
> think it makes sense with stuff that is supposed to be up to date with
> current versions.
>

I would normally definitely agree with you if these two conditions were met:
 - the project was evolving at a non-geologic speed
 - there was evidence that if we encountered a problem, they would assist us

I mean: the guile subsystem is the heart of lilypond, being held ransom (or
rather, completely ignored) by a group of people that
seems to show no interest in our issues is not what I'd considered a
strategy of growth and fruitful collaboration.

Besides: you say "current" version, but we're in this thread exactly
because we can't, in fact, use the current version.
(By a mile, I think the only one that works well is 2.2.7, right?) This
hodgerypockery would at least give us true current,
but we'd have to patch it, then again we'd be in a position where we _can_
patch it.

So at the cost of rocking the cage a bit hard, I came asking the
uncomfortable question:
what would happen if (for this unique circumstance) we'd do what one would
normally consider poor practice?

L

-- 
Luca Fascione