Le 07/03/2018 à 17:27, Uwe Stöhr a écrit :
In general: I have no problem in being criticized. But I have a problem that I am talking directly to the MiKTeX developer to find a solution and when I do what he proposes you are telling me that it can be done better.

I think you are indeed the one who knows how to tweak the current system to make it work. However, it is good to have an external eye that can question some of the basic decisions made for this installer.

I have done my share of clever systems that work magically except when they break down miserably. Now I try to think more in terms of robustness.

Miktex documentation explicitly recommends to use the Miktex Console to get updates, and does not set the update mechanism to automatic.

The MiKTeX Console (introduced around end of January) is the new update mechanism. Before, there was no MiKTeX Console. Also many new options you see in the MiKTeX docs didn't exist before and can therefore not be used for LyX users having older installations.

OK, I see now. But wasn't there something equivalent before that?

This is why we should not change a system that works

See my last mail in this thread. It is not LyX that breaks something, it is MiKTeX itself.

This is where we have to wonder whether we shall rely on a system that is so fragile. I understand that distributions are user's choice, but it is a pity that we can be so vulnerable to other people's bug. We try to be very careful with our stable releases, and then we can have catastrophic results due to always having the latest version of whatever package someone releases.

Yes ;-) Also very good to know.
If you want to reproduce what I am talking about:
- uninstall MiKTeX
- install LyX 2.3.0RC1 bundle (Contains old MiKTeX installer from October); deny to update MiKTeX - reconfigure LyX or try to compile a LyX file that uses a package you don't have yet.

I am not sure that I will find enough time in front of this particular computer to try that.

Today I found one of the problems, which is funny: Some MiKTeX versions use its update program for the update. During the update they try to delete this program (itself) which is of course impossible. As result you get a MiKTeX with still all packages there but latex cannot find them anymore because all links to them were not reset in the new package system.

This is alas not funny at all... Can't we rely on old-and-trusty miktex versions? I see that you often try to update miktex as soon as possible, but is it wise?

Sure, but then please start your Win laptops and try installing different MiKTeX versions to see the different results LyX users will get. Some won't see any problems, some will get a completely broken MiKTeX. Testing this costs hours - it took a long time before I could the first time reproduce what users reported back on our mailing lists.

I have to admit that I will find not the time to do it. I understand how time consuming this testing is, nd I am grateful that you spend time on it. But then we must find a way to reduce this burden on you. What I am proposing is to ask ourselves: "where did we got it wrong?".

Well, the OS of choice of elegant people is macOS and you cannot argue that they do not care that thing do not "just work". Yet, they install MacTeX, which come in only one size (3G), maybe the 500M of extras if they are very fussy and they are happy with it. It does not update, but once a year one can install a new one.

I won't discuss about OSes. Users made their choice. I focus on Win users. They have 2 options: - they have background knowledge or the time to learn about LaTeX. They can setup TeXLive or MiKTeX as they like since they know what a package is. - they just need a working LyX and are not interested in how things work behind LyX

I think that explaining people how to install LaTeX themselves is the way to go. You cannot bear the weight of basically maintaining a LaTeX distribution on top of the ever changing MikTex. The example of rupee that you gave later in your message is typically an example of things going wrong. You cannot afford to use your time to fix these issues. If it is so important, let's tell people to install the full textlive version and forget about any other problem.

To say the same thing differently, one design problem that I see is that you are starting from Miktex, that tries to keep the TeX installation to a minimum, and than take great pains to add everything that may be useful on top of it. Why not use a distribution that has it all, to begin with?

I understand that is not a solution for the 2.3.0 installer, which I am not qualified to fix.

I work in the machine building industry. I have clever colleagues, some with a Ph.D. So they are not children, but they have to focus on their job. For example, recently I was informed on Monday that on Wednesday the operation manual of a new device must be ready. These are more than 40 pages in 2 days but this is a standard task. Therefore I cannot fiddle around with software things, I have to spend all my time on the text (to fulfill all norms, that no info is missing etc.) My daily experience is that nobody cares what software you are using (if it generates no cost), as long as you do your job in time. If you are faster with LibreOffice than with PowerPoint to prepare your presentations, then do it. There is no excuse if you are not ready in time because of a software problem.

Incidentally, this is why the software should not update itself during these sessions.

People who use wavy underlines deserve whatever happen ;)

This is an attitude I don't like. This is respectless to users. There are so many cases where you cannot decide on your own. Look at all the norms around. Sometimes they require things that are typographically stupid (e.g. I recently stumbled over "italic, underlined") or your boss likes strange things. Also if you are free to decide, if a software offers me a feature I like, I expect that I can use it.

I knew it was unfair when I wrote it, but like the scorpion of the fable, I could not help doing it ;)
But it was a joke, remember.


Reply via email to