Re: Migration and documents

[David Tangye <..hidden..>]

On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 18:12 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> The manual ought to be structured in such a way that a sole proprietor
> should be able to teach himself how to administer and use the software
> easily.  The manual is designed to be worked through consecutively and
> that is why it is all in one document.  Advanced users and consultants
> can find more technical information in part 2 which is separated from
> the rest so that people know where to go for workflow or technical
> documentation.  It is also where it is because we assume the reader
> has already read the rest of the manual.
Good, you have defined the target (reader). This needs to be in its
Intro.

My only issue is that I am seeing technical info mixed into accounting
info. I see a need for users to have info relating to accounting, and
how to use the software to perform accounting, in as much detail as you
like, separate from software/I.T. issues. I see the need to cater for
domain experts (ie accounting stuff/theory etc) who are not software
experts. These two areas of expertise are being mixed/confused in the
ducumentation. They should be clearly separated. I believe I can see
that this is easy to do and useful. My view does not appear to be
shared. I can accept that.

> I suppose my past remarks deserve some clarification.  It was not an
> attempt to devalue your priorities.  I just don't think those
> priorities are things we can reasonably get to at the moment
By we, you actually mean you, since 99% of software is only written by
you. Maybe you need to get more help.
>  and
> sometimes, I get the impression that you are making demands on us
> without any idea of what you are asking.
I am not making demands, just suggestions. If some are written bluntly,
its because its done hurriedly. Like many people here, I make absolutely
no money from this at all, so I have limited time to read all the
emails and then write. Everyone should know that in the open-source
community no-one is in a position to demand.

> We all know that the software needs a *lot* of work to be easily
> usable by most people who have a basic knowledge of bookkeeping.
I think its agreed lately that currently LSMB can only be installed by
those who have some amount of technical software expertise,
specifically, can install postgres, create databases, and understand and
run command line shell commands and scripts. It is therefore not
suitable for users who might install software eg using Ubuntu and its
package management front-end, or Windows software like MYOB or
Quickbooks. I think this should be clearly stated, eg on the website
etc.

> However, I don't think that any of this matters if the software does
> not operate properly in terms of the priorities I mentioned: [snip]
>   If you want to wait until the codebase is in better shape, that is fine.
Noted.

> But frequently complaining
> about user experience at the moment is not going to make the situation
> better.
Well at least there is recognition of the user experience problem here.
One cannot fix something until the problem is 1.reported,
2.recognised/accepted as a problem.

I accept that this is given a low priority.

Cheers
David Tangye