Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> There's lots of untrustworthy syntax floating around in the docs,
> and James and I (more him than me) have been doing our best to
> straighten it out.  We could really use some advanced[1] users to
> help out.
>
> [1] if you know what "\with" does, then you're "advanced" as far
> as I'm concerned.
>
> This is *NOT* directed at programmers.  Programmers should keep on
> programming.  This is directed at users.

That's forgetting multipliers.  If a programmer can write a
documentation chapter which has the effect of turning a user into an
advanced user, that's exchanging a one-time cost from an expensive
resource into a self-sustaining stream of cheap resources.

I am working on making it _easier_ to become an advanced user both by
lowering the required skill level for advanced tasks, as well as raising
the quality of the available documentation (it is not like
git shortlog --author Kastrup Documentation
is exactly empty if you remove all Documentation pertaining to changes
of mine, and it is not like all "programmers" even bother updating or
writing the Documentation for their own changes and additions).

I can't work more than fulltime on all fronts at once.  But it does not
make it easier if people make it harder to do my job by routing stuff
around me and other programmers that is likely to come crashing down on
our heads at some point of time anyway.

Since nobody is paying me for working on Lilypond, the amount of time I
am going to work fulltime on Lilypond (and since I am bad at focusing on
more than one project, likely also the time I am going to work at all on
Lilypond) is limited to until I run out of cash.  I am spending this
time as effectively as I manage to do.

Mailing list flames are not effective.  But more effective than
switching the computer off and walking about fuming.

-- 
David Kastrup