|
From: | Tim McNamara |
Subject: | Re: Feature request |
Date: | Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:43:14 -0500 |
On Oct 27, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Valentin Villenave wrote:
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Tim McNamara <address@hidden> wrote:Hmm. This is prompting a rather harsh reaction from me which willpredictably draw all kinds of flames. I am always bemused by the recurrent user-dismissive attitude that pervades Unix-based FOSS projects: "Whaddya mean you don't want to use a kludgy command and you want something neat andelegant instead?"I'm afraid you didn't get the point I was trying to make. I am precisely the one who has recently been spending ONE full-time BLOODY WEEK just to make sure that in 2.14 people won't have to type \include "italiano.ly" but something like: \language "italiano"
Nifty!
So, believe me, I'm with on you on the "intuitive, neat and elegant" side. (Which makes Graham's answer quite ironic indeed.) What I did mean, however, is that your average user doesn't even know what SVG is, let alone how to obtain it. If we *did* open a feature request, if anything, I'd make it a bit more ambitious: why limit ourselves to SVG? For example, how come that one has to type -fpng and not --png? How come that tagline isn't automatically disabled, and mogrify -trim isn't invoked automatically when compiling short examples? etc. And finally, as you pointed out (and rightfully so), there are quite a few other areas where we could, and should, be more user-friendly. Some of which may be more pressing than the SVG backend. (Which doesn't prevent us from opening a feature request in the tracker right now, granted.)
Thanks for the excellent reply, Valentin.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |