[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: lilypond-user
Subject: Re: LilyPond 2.23.8 released
From: Freeman Gilmore <freeman.gilmore () gmail ! com>
Date: 2022-04-27 15:18:41
Message-ID: CAM=7=uTV7-HhTP_fYtOH+Xy5fM6DWEeFXHa-XDX3oqNEJgVjFw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
What I saw was confusing to me and should have been clear to me from my
background. That is my fault. I was thinking "binaries'', now i have
to compile, I do not want to do that; It is worded correctly. True it
would be better to make it simpler to understand for someone that has on
knowledge of programming. Something like what Carl did but using the word
program instead of binary. .Too many words can have the same effect of
confusion.
Thank you, =C6=92g.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:44 AM David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
> Freeman Gilmore <freeman.gilmore@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:03 AM Carl Sorensen <
> carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> LilyPond does *not* have one binary for all. It has one source code f=
or
> >> all.
> >>
> > That helps
> >
> >>
> >> I think that there can be a bit of confusion here due to the fact that
> two
> >> elements in the list aren't binaries. There are three binaries:
> GNU/Linux
> >> x86_64, macOS x86_64, and Windows x86_64. Then there are two other
> >> links: Source code and instructions for building with MacPorts.
> Perhaps we
> >> could separate the binaries from the other links. That's what we do o=
n
> the
> >> stable download page.
> >>
> >
> > So I was wrong from the start. I was looking for the program for
> > windows, Windows x86_64,. not realising that the program I was looking
> > for was a binary which is compiled from the source code. Sorry this
> > is all stuff from the past at one time i understood, just confused.
>
> If it's all stuff from the past at one time you understood, there are
> likely enough people around for whom this is all stuff from the future
> they are yet to understand and it would seem like a bad idea to turn
> this into a roadblock for using LilyPond for them.
>
> So you certainly did highlight that we may be relying on an
> overabundance of technobabble fluency on our download pages.
>
> There might be a point in trying to sort and rephrase our points of
> first contact pages in a manner where installing LilyPond is not going
> to be an uphill battle already because of language problems.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="color:#993399">What I saw was \
confusing to me and should have been clear to me from my background. That is my \
fault. I was thinking "binaries'', now i have to compile, I do \
not want to do that; It is worded correctly. True it would be better to make \
it simpler to understand for someone that has on knowledge of programming. \
Something like what Carl did but using the word program instead of binary. .Too \
many words can have the same effect of confusion.</div><div class="gmail_default" \
style="color:#993399">Thank you, ƒg.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div \
dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:44 AM David Kastrup <<a \
href="mailto:dak@gnu.org" target="_blank">dak@gnu.org</a>> \
wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px \
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Freeman Gilmore <<a \
href="mailto:freeman.gilmore@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">freeman.gilmore@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br> <br>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:03 AM Carl Sorensen <<a \
href="mailto:carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">carl.d.sorensen@gmail.com</a>><br> > wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> LilyPond does *not* have one binary for all. It has one source code \
for<br> >> all.<br>
>><br>
> That helps<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> I think that there can be a bit of confusion here due to the fact that \
two<br> >> elements in the list aren't binaries. There are three \
binaries: GNU/Linux<br> >> x86_64, macOS x86_64, and Windows x86_64. Then \
there are two other<br> >> links: Source code and instructions for building \
with MacPorts. Perhaps we<br> >> could separate the binaries from the other \
links. That's what we do on the<br> >> stable download page.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> So I was wrong from the start. I was looking for the program for<br>
> windows, Windows x86_64,. not realising that the program I was looking<br>
> for was a binary which is compiled from the source code. Sorry this<br>
> is all stuff from the past at one time i understood, just confused.<br>
<br>
If it's all stuff from the past at one time you understood, there are<br>
likely enough people around for whom this is all stuff from the future<br>
they are yet to understand and it would seem like a bad idea to turn<br>
this into a roadblock for using LilyPond for them.<br>
<br>
So you certainly did highlight that we may be relying on an<br>
overabundance of technobabble fluency on our download pages.<br>
<br>
There might be a point in trying to sort and rephrase our points of<br>
first contact pages in a manner where installing LilyPond is not going<br>
to be an uphill battle already because of language problems.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
David Kastrup<br>
</blockquote></div>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic