On 03/12/2018 12:44 AM, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
> On 12/03/2018 4:32 p.m., Richard Heck wrote:
>> On 03/11/2018 04:52 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>>> Am 11.03.2018 um 18:12 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
>>>
>>>> I think that's what we're doing. The basic disagreement we have is
>>>> that
>>>> I think adding a dialog will bring more benefit than harm.
>>> And I made clear why I am opposed to this.
>>> In the end it costs my spare time if something does not work. Users
>>> will contact me in this case. Therefore I focus on average users.
>> That is a serious mistake: to focus on "average users". But it has
>> clearly become pointless to discuss this any longer.
>>
>> If users are contacting YOU because of issues with the installer, then
>> that is the problem, as others have already said.
>>
>> I do not know how we should resolve this matter now. But, longer term,
>> we need someone to create a Windows installer that JUST installs LyX,
>> much the way the OSX installer does. As JMarc said, users on OSX seem to
>> manage to install a LaTeX distribution, etc, independently. Surely
>> Windows users can manage to do the same.
>>
>> It has become a serious problem the extent to which *MiKTeX* bugs now
>> delay LyX releases, require updated installers (two or three for every
>> minor version), and the like. And the problems of 'average users', so
>> far as I can see, are almost all due to tight integration with MiKTeX.
>> It is far from clear to me why we actively promote, and almost require,
>> on Windows, the use of a LaTeX distribution that is so unstable that
>> simply reconfiguring LyX can (apparently) break it.
>>
>> LyX was never meant to be so closely integrated with a particular LaTeX
>> distribution, and it was a mistake to make it so. I understand the
>> desire to offer a simpler installation process that gives the user a
>> fully functional LyX installation (though, since no such thing is
>> offered on any other platform, I'm a bit skeptical about how essential
>> this really is). But, at the very least, if we are going to 'integrate'
>> some LaTeX distribution into an offical LyX product, then we should make
>> it one that is stable: the LaTeX equivalent of an Ubuntu LTS release,
>> that cannot so easily be broken.
>>
>> Richard
>>
> Uwe provides two installers at present, one of which does NOT install
> MiKTeX and which could be used, if I understand right, with any LaTeX
> distribution (or at least TeXLive or MiKTeX). This is the one that
> I've always used -- mainly from using dial up until a few years ago. 
> The bundle installer was far too big to download by dial up. I used
> Uwe's installer-1 for 2.3.0 and have used 2.3.0 every day through the
> problem period without issues. Possibly the lack of problems for me is
> because I didn't use the MiKTeX console for updating MiKTeX but the
> older update program (miktex-update_admin.exe). (In fact I wasn't
> aware that there was such a thing as the console until reading about
> it in the present discussion.)

I know there are these two installers, but it was my understanding from
the present discussion that even the basic installer was affected by the
MiKTeX bugs we've been fighting. Perhaps I misunderstood, but Scott
asked a very explicit question along those lines.

If you're right, then perhaps what we need to do is simply offer the
basic installer 'officially' and not the bundle.

Richard

Reply via email to