Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Negative connotation. But reversed (see below) it is not actually that >> bad. >> >> "it is strongly recommended that only experienced users try working with >> this release. Everyone else is encouraged to use the stable 2.16 >> version instead." >> >> Something like that. > > Why not simply state the case. What are the reasons to recommend only > experienced users, why boilerplately encourage 2.16? > > Probably: > * we don't want people inadvertently upgrading > * we don't want clueless bug reports: we don't want to answer them > and we don't want to ignore them > * we don't want users who need a new feature try this for production > and in the moment of printing find out something basic broken > * we don't want users to ruin their lilypond setup and asking for > help how to downgrade
We don't want people to install what amounts to a snapshot of development activity in mixed quality and stick with it for years and use it for setting up a school computer pool. > LilyPond 2.17.x, aka the my-hickup-or-yours?-release. > > This is a development release. As such, it has not had [XXX testing or > stabilation/wide user testing ] so we cannot give any guarantees and we > cannot give any user support. > > Clueful and accurate bug reports are highly valued, however, this > means that you must be actively tracking development and reading the > bug-lilypond list. If you are not, you are invited to do so, see > COMMUNITY. I don't like the connotations of "Clueful" here. And it should be sufficient to carefully read the bug reporting instructions. > If you depend on a feature listed in CHANGES [listing the newly added > ones would be nice], and you are not discouraged by now, you may want > to give this a try. Remember: you're on your own! -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel