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

[David Kastrup]

"address@hidden" <address@hidden> writes:

> Le Dec 4, 2011 à 11:27 AM, Graham Percival a écrit :
>
>> 
>> 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.
>
> I think this is a great idea - I'm sure that there are several users
> who have valuable knowledge to contribute to the dox.

So what?  I have put up patches with complete functionality where the
only remaining, frog level work (marked as such and sketched out) was to
adjust doc strings and variable names.

<URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1976>

Users can't be bothered with contributing.  They'll pay a few thousand
dollars for single copies of proprietary software without support.  But
they won't write 10 lines of documentation and weazel out of any
obligation.  But of course, it is your holy duty as a programmer of free
software to do everything they can think of (without reading the
documentation, of course) without mentioning something as dirty as being
able to live from something, because you were magically born into the
caste of programmers, bound to slave away for the real humans who can't
be bothered to read a few lines educating themselves because they would
stand in danger of sinking to the level of your pedestal.

-- 
David Kastrup