Re: gub: I can now completely build lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Knut Petersen <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Werner!
>>
>> Not having tested your patch yet, but I'm not happy with it.  Not a
>> single package in gub uses `linux-x86::cross/gcc' for stuff in `tools'
>> – it would tie gub compilation to GNU/Linux, AFAICS.
>
> Yes.
>
> That's why I asked
>
>    "Could anyone point out on what kind of systems gub is supposed to run?"
>
> in an earlier message.

"supposed to run" is quite unspecific.  I took it to mean "on what kind
of system should we expect gub to work in its current state", not "what
kind of system dependency are we free to introduce into gub".

There are quite few people actively working with gub and/or able to
deliver qualified feedback, so for the sake of not introducing dead ends
that will be hard to get out of again in future for either you or
others, it would make sense if you did not just ask sort-of generic
questions and made decisions based on answers or non-answers but
actually explained what you are intending to use that information for.

That will give also sort-of dormant developers a chance to notice, and
voice objections that they know or feel to be relevant.

That will, of course, make for messier back-and-forths and
decision-making but the result will be that actually a decision has been
made on some sort of consensus, and with the input of people with
different focus the likelihood that some of them will run into
roadblocks when they do try to reengage with development is less.

Thanks for working on this!

-- 
David Kastrup