Re: Why is it _still_ so freaking hard to get info with images?

[Graham Percival]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:50:23PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Anyway, as it stands, there is no documentation in obvious places about
> how to make things run, the build procedures are highly non-standard,
> the targets are non-standard.
> 
> I am holding a talk tomorrow about Lilypond on a Linux conference.  That
> is the state I am going to report.

They care deeply about the ease of compiling the bleeding-edge
unstable branch?  Weird.  But hey, I'm not going to argue that we
open-source developers aren't weird.  :)

> It is a bit disappointing since the info documentation with images is
> essential for really getting moving smoothly with Lilypond,

Oh please.  There's perhaps a dozen people in the world who want
to read info docs for lilypond.  Everybody else uses html or pdf.



Now, I *will* admit that I've been confused and stymied by the
lilypond build process.  I've also spent a few hours looking at it
to try to add new things (docs and lsr, obviously), but have
always given up and whined to Han-Wen or Jan or John to add the
stuff I wanted.  I also agree that "make web" is *not* the most
intuitive way to create the local documentation.

But IMO there's more important tasks to tackle in the near future.
This isn't a problem for our end-users, and it doesn't appear to
be a problem for any of our other contributors.  I really think
this falls into the category of "does not meet the cost / benefit
ratio".

Cheers,
- Graham