Re: [guile-2.2] patches

[David Kastrup]

Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:

> But back to the initial question.
>
> Possibilities:
> (1) I could try to revise the guile2-patches and implement them in master.
> (2) Doing the same but placing them in a new public branch for guile-2.2
> (3) We could fork guile-1.8.
>
> I think we need a consensus or at least sort of a roadmap.

My take is the following:

a) for the precompiled LilyPond versions, foregoing Guile-1.8 is not a
sensible option at the moment.  We need to provide something working
well.  If I remember correctly, we don't need to fork yet, right?

b) We want the guile-2-patches in master (with suitable guards/wrappers
so that Guile-1.8 keeps working).  If possible and feasible, in a
working state for both 2.0 and 2.2.  If not possible/feasible, focusing
on Guile 2.2.  We are spread thin enough with porting work as we are,
and it does appear like Guile 2.2 is not going to end up as a dead-end
version, at least in comparison to Guile 2.0.

-- 
David Kastrup