Re: A thought on Windows Experience

[Urs Liska]

Am 04.12.2013 20:24, schrieb David Kastrup:
> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Am 04.12.2013 19:44, schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > Catering for integration of Frescobaldi would be a real headache.  And
> > > the documentation would need adapting as well.  That's not to say
> > > anything about the value provided by such an approach, but it would
> > > likely make a lot more sense and a lot less work if the primary
> > > installed application was Frescobaldi and it offered to install LilyPond
> > > for you using one of our installers, rather than trying to do it the
> > > other way round.
> > >
> > > It would also make juggling with several versions a lot nicer since then
> > > Frescobaldi can manage paths, and knows where it put things.
> > I don't know if that's something which could get a sufficient majority
> > because it somehow would make Frescobaldi look like an official editor
> > ;-)
> Not really.  We'd just recommend downloading and installing Frescobaldi
> on certain platforms for getting a customary user experience rather than
> a command line application.

OK. Then I suggest we will come back if we have managed to integrate 
LilyPond installation in Frescobaldi (Actually Wilbert says it was in 
Frescobaldi 1, although Linux only).
I think it's a good idea to do it in Frescobaldi anyway, then we/you can 
still consider how to communicate it to the end-user.
> > Bit I'm quite sure it would be trivial to include such a functionality
> > in Fresobaldi.
> For a very variable value of "trivial".  But I think it would make sense
> to do this distribution of labor/development for platforms where it
> would work.

Of course.

> > It would be simple to add a menu item that looks for updates, fetches
> > and installs LilyPond, and finally adds it to the list of configured
> > LilyPond instances.
> > Such a function could easily be added to the installation process of
> > Frescobaldi.
> >
> > Well, maybe a good idea to add that anyway.
> It seems like a more common use case to use Frescobaldi for managing
> multiple LilyPond's installed by LilyPond's installer than the other way
> round, namely managing multiple Frescobaldi instances.

{
  \updateFrescobaldi #'stable-only
}

LOL

But actually I've implemented a menu in Frescobaldi that allows you to 
switch versions based on Git branches available. The next steps will be 
to update through Git, then allow switching to versions on branches of 
other remotes (i.e. contributors).
Of course everything can be done with a few Git commands. But I'm sure 
it will boost the collaborative spirit if there's a menu structure 
telling me which branches other contributors are working on.

Urs

>