Re: survey on multiple development versions

[Shane Brandes]

Working on many parallel versions seems in some ways seductive, the
dream of improving many things all at once, but I agree keeping to a
single release cycle is definitely less prone to creating all sorts of
unintended problems from conflicting development to documentation
degradation. This program is at point where many many things work
right and very well. The LilyPond wishlist of functionality might be
incomplete, but it will get there or at least it should. We have some
highly useful people keeping things in order, especially David K. In
any event if a roadmap of future effort was released it might allow
people the ability to give there input in a more structured way.
Sometimes it feels like certain things are accomplished as people
happen to get them. or as people are pushed to get to them. Any my
point is the progress seems nebulous at times, maybe it isn't.
in terms of usage I have been running usually the latest release and
jump to the next current when I do more LilyPond work which makes my
updating of the program sporadic and not in line with the release
dates. This is one of the few programs that does not cause any fears
about upgrading to the edge. So I would suspect there are many other
users that upgrade to a unstable release for that bright shiny new
feature or curiosity, but it might not be the case there would be
enough to have any sort of rigorous base of use to support multiple
development versions.
As for plugins, that notion is a dismal sop. As people have pointed
out plugins are hard to maintain long term, and to me at least when i
need such things it really spoke loudly about the basic inadequacy of
the program being used. At least in my experience it has been very
rare that something could not be achieved without resort to simply
waiting it out for the development to catch up to demand, basically
because our user base has an incredible knack for making work arounds
with the existing functionality. And with each release it seems the
need for these work arounds goes down.
So the level of thrashing things out is good to see, keep at it, but
let us not get into a situation where we are forking ourselves to
death and ruining the steak.

Shane


On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
> Am 10.12.2013 18:30, schrieb SoundsFromSound:
>
>> For whatever it's worth, I've always used unstable builds from about 2
>> weeks
>> after I started using LilyPond. I began with stable, but then quickly
>> hopped
>> on the unstables and have had zero issues with my scores.
>>
>> I love the bleeding edge, what can I say?:)  I am a risk-taker! lol
>>
> Using unstable versions of a program like LilyPond is much less a risk than
> using a GUI tool that can crash and wipe away your current work.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user