Re: Disagree with recent DOC change

[James Bailey]

On 08.02.2010, at 14:02, David Kastrup wrote:

> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:02 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > > I don't think that this is useful advice since binaries often are
> > > > > incompatible with Scheme/Lilypond trees of other versions, and  
> > > > > since
> > > > > many regressions are not introduced in the binaries.
> > > >
> > > > Trevor meant the GUB packages, which install the "actual binary"
> > > > as well as the scheme stuff, fonts, etc.
> > >
> > > Then the proper wording is "downloading binary releases" or "binary
> > > packages".  But "binaries" means something different.
> >
> > I think this is nitpicking; we don't release just the binary files
> > separately; people'd have to go through contortions to do what you
> > think is suggested.
>
> Well, _I_ understood the wording wrong.  Do you really want to bet  
> your
> life on it that I am the most stupid person possibly ever working with
> Lilypond, so that nobody else possibly could misunderstand?

You (and your understanding) are not the target audience for this  
information. This information is meant for non-developer/nin-git  
users. The people who don't use git (i.e., me) don't know that there  
is a difference between a binary and a binary release. So while your  
confusion is understood, and the change to more precise may be  
helpful, it may also be more confusing to someone who's never heard  
of a binary release and equates the word "binary" with, "the thing I  
download from the lilypond release page".