[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > Why not edit the texinfo source directly, and send a patch? > > You are asking the users to learn texinfo, diff and patch before they > can help you. And as someone else pointed out, if they install a prebuilt > version, they don't even have the texinfo source. > > (Personally, gnu info is the only thing that has ever made me want to run > screaming back to windows, but maybe that's just the user-interface.) > > > I conceed to the various points made about wiki. In addition, it would > impossible to filter with lilypond and still pretend to have any sort of > security. > > The "manual with comments" format might still help you, though. > Whenever you take a documentation-day before a release, you could review > the new comments, and incorporate good suggestions into the docs. > It lowers the barrier for users, and isn't a constant drain on your time.
Yes true. Is anyone willing to host a wiki for this? It would be easy to link foobar.html into a wiki?foobar/ site. > In another message, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > I agree with Jan on this one: if the threshold is lowered, then we > > will get less useful information. > > Um, are you getting *any* useful information now? via documentation > bug-reports and patches, that is? No, not that much, but I don't get much useless information that I have to sift through. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Lilypond-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user