Re: Feature request

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:06:27AM -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
> 
> On Oct 27, 2010, at 8:05 AM, Valentin Villenave wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Robert Clausecker
> ><address@hidden> wrote:
> >>Hi guys!
> >>As we have a good support for SVG now, wouldn't it be nice to add a
> >>--svg switch to the program, so that you can write
> >>
> >>   lilypond --svg fancystuff.ly
> >>
> >I think we can safely assume that this kind of users *also* tend to
> >know what a program's Documentation is, and where to look for it.
> >What do you think?
> 
> Hmm.  This is prompting a rather harsh reaction from me which will
> predictably draw all kinds of flames.  I am always bemused by the
> recurrent user-dismissive attitude that pervades Unix-based FOSS
> projects:

Ironically, I'm the resident champinion of the "shut up and read
the docs, you stupid user" camp for lilypond, but I thought the
email was completely valid.

- it was sent to bug-lilypond, which is where it should be.
- it was a well-written, well-reasoned feature request.
- it would unquestionably bring lilypond usage into a more
  consistent manner ( -f=xyz or --xyz )


Now, I recall this being discussed a few years ago, and there was
some reason why it was difficult to implement -f=svg.  So there's
virtually no chance of it getting included before 2.14... but the
feature request itself was, as far as I can tell, completely fine.
The only reason why it shouldn't be in the tracker is if there's
*already* a request for this precise thing.
(I know it was discussed a few years ago, but I'm not certain if
it got a tracker issue)

> We've got a bunch of arcane stuff in Lilypond, which is why we have
> four PDF files of documentation with a total of 1205 pages (for
> 12.2.3),

Much more than four, BTW.  I think we have 10.

Cheers,
- Graham