Re: Python 3 support

[David Kastrup]

Julien Rioux <address@hidden> writes:

> If you are keen on it, why not? Not sure if it's worth the trouble,
> though: Maybe more visibility would bring GUB more workers, and in
> that vein endorsement by a big player would be a boost. Unfortunately,
> I'm not sure GUB has a strong significance anymore. With no
> maintainer, no support team, virtually no devs, it's not attractive
> for new projects, which then opt for other cross-build solutions
> instead.

There is not a lot around to opt for as far as I know.

> The current hosting situation isn't bad that we need to take such
> important actions with savannah. With github, we already have hosting,
> a platform for contribution and review comments, and relatively strong
> visibility, at no effort from us.

Who is "we"?  I for one am not going to agree to GitHub's quite invasive
usage conditions for their "free" offerings which include killing a
project for any reason they want to at any point of time, explicitly
citing bandwidth usage as one such reason.

Now the situation is in theory not all that different with Savannah.
Except that Savannah does not serve stockholders but its users and Free
Software.  When they find that there is a technical problem in
connection with serving a project, "pull the plug" will be way lower in
the list of remedies than with GitHub.

> It seems there is confusion about who owns the "official" repo, which
> is easily solved if we move the repo from an individual to an
> organization. And since it's literally a click or two to do that, I
> though I would suggest it in passing. Anyway, we're sidestepping.

Sure.  I am not involved with GUB or the GitHub repos.  So the question
what to use for LilyPond is likely mostly up to Phil.

-- 
David Kastrup