Re: [Vim-latex-devel] Does vim-latex show a general problem of OS?

[Simon P. <pre...@gm...>]

Rather than ruminate on the woes of open source software, it would be much
more sensible to describe to the list the details of your problems - e.g.
your operating system, what error messages you get, etc.

Then hopefully somebody will be able to help.


On 3/27/07, Heiko Schr=F6der <hei...@vo...> wrote:
>
> Dear list,
>
> vim and LaTeX are genius inventions not only because of their great
> functionality, but also because of their splendid documentation. It is
> like a
> great forest where it is *not* possible to hide any non-documented eggs.
> What about the latex-vim suite?  :-|
>
> It is said that the suite runs with vim6+. Obviously it is meant vim6.x,
> not
> version 7.x. I did *exactly* what is said in the installation instruction=
s
> on
> different machines -- with vim7.0. Exactly with no exception. Nothing
> happens.
>
> I  know and I appreciate it very much that the suite is work done by free
> will. Indeed! And that the members of this list help by their free will.
> That
> is great, but it does not solve IMHO the general problem. It is clear tha=
t
> a
> software has its development stage. But if something is called stable, it
> *must* have a good installation instruction (more important than a user
> manual). Otherwise it IS in development.
>
> Especially in this case if the software  is aimed to *help* users. Which
> users? Those who are lucky to have requirement no. 6.1.1-2 (and not
> 6.1.1-2.1
> where the usage *sometimes* fails)? Sureley not those who celebrate Easte=
r
> again, searching for the non documented eggs hidden *between* the lines o=
f
> the instructions, meaning perhaps that 7.0 is not 6.+ but obviously 6.++.
> And -- if you really think, think right -- we *did* say 6.+ ONLY, nothing
> more     ;-).
>
> And: *See those lucky people. Can't you imagine, that you DID a mistake?
> They
> can run it, so everyone *could* run it, if one only uses its brain -- Yes=
,
> you have to think, but think right.  Find out WHAT is meant, not what is
> NOT
> meant or what we mean that it should be clear that it IS not meant.*  And
> if
> you do not succeed read the FAQ (Feigned Annoying Questions -- which have
> never been asked) ;-)
>
> Please apologize for coming a bit too steep out of the hedge. But
> OpenSource
> is by a too great amount of people still  regarded as *software for
> specialists* -- and that shows IMHO that there is something wrong; but no=
t
> about OpenSource! Nobody cares about the free willing work done by the
> user
> (and it *is* sureley not important). Software *cannot* be free of bugs.
> That
> is clear.But a suite which sometimes works and sometimes with not hints
> what
> could be wrong is use-less (in the exact meaning).
>
> Best regards
> Heiko Schroeder
>
> --
> Heiko Schroeder
> Praha, Ceska Republica
> http://home.foni.net/~heikos
> http://www.od.shuttle.de/evb-1
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Vim-latex-devel mailing list
> Vim...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vim-latex-devel
>