[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: lilypond and python

        Hi again,

On Fri, Jul 21, 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Unfortunately, the patch is not against the new upstream lilypond.

 As I suggested in #357057, I suggest you copy the sed snippet and go on
 with the Python transition with a 2.4 build requirement.  This will
 work even after the transition, and doesn't require more work.

> Since Matthias Klose says that python-defaults points to 2.4 in
> experimental, I can package lilypond and upload it to experimental;
> that will probably happen this weekend unless an unexpected problem
> arises.

 This would only fix problems in experimental, lilypond is currently not
 releasable, so imaginating that the Python switch would not happen, we
 would end up without lilypond.
   It also didn't switch to the new Python policy, and I know that the
 number of libraries converted to the new Python policy was a good
 indicator of the progress towards switching the default python runtime,
 i.e. it's the other way around: first convert a maximum number of
 packages to the new policy and then switch the default python runtime.

 BTW, did you take note of the problems I mentionned or would you prefer
 them reported in a bug report or even multiple bug reports?

Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>

Reply to: