Re: lilypond and python
Loïc Minier <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I believe the patch you sent was not against the current upstream
>> release, unless you are referring to something different.
> I am not the lilypond maintainer, I don't want to have to download an
> upstream tarball or prepare a CVS snapshot or whatever for a package
> I'm not interested in. The package has received some attention because
> you complained publicly about python not being python2.4, and I was
> curious to see how complex it would have been to sed the scripts to use
> python2.4 instead of waiting for python to be python2.4.
"I am not the maintainer" is the refrain of people who don't want to
help. You don't have to help; nobody is ordering you to. I explained
what would help, and got a lot of people with uninformed guesses about
what would help, but no actual assistance.
Nobody has to help, but they seemed to be more interested in proving
that I'm hopeless than actually helping. In your case, you claimed to
be helping, by providing a "solution" to a problem that simply didn't
exist (how to use python2.4 with the old lilypond version). And, I
was already clear that this didn't help anything.
That's entirely fair enough; the point was that I said that
"such-and-such" would help me, and you provided something entirely
different which doesn't help anyone. Thanks to Adeodato Simó who
actually helped by providing something that works well.
And, as it happens, works far better than the "cheap and easy" advice
to just use sed to change "python" to "python2.4" all over the place.
If every one of the proud insisters about how easy it is would reflect
on the fact that they utterly failed to suggest the correct solution,
this might do some good.