Re: Doc split: "program usage"

[Graham Percival]

John Mandereau wrote:
> Le jeudi 26 juillet 2007 à 22:41 -0700, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
> > Sounds good, but I'd leave out the INSTALL docs. We haven't looked at
> > this for a long time.  People should get the gub builds or take the
> > lilypond  that comse with their distro.

This is the driving force behind this rearrangement (and rewriting of 
INSTALL): I can really emphasize the binaries.

> Right, but what about developers or contributors who need to compile?
> INSTALL is still valuable to me.  The only problem is, INSTALL may not
> list possible bugs or problems with recent configurations (64 bits
> boxes, ...).

This is also true.  I recall that Erik posted a long email about how to 
compile gub from darcs (or something like that); I might like to have a 
look at compiling lilypond once I have a linux box (and thus not depend 
on the binaries all the time)... and some doc/translators might really 
appreciate knowing the "make EXTERNAL_BINARY" trick.

Cheers,
- Graham