Ok, since I am not apparently getting _any_ answers but just unrelated buzzphrases pasted to the top of the quoted communication time and again, I will briefly point out first how we communicate on this list. One quotes the _pertinent_ part of the documentation first, then adds one's answers usually in-line to the pertinent questions.
John Roper <johnroper...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Feb 4, 2017 5:59 PM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> >>> John Roper <johnroper...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>> >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 4:46 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> My question probably was not clear enough. What tangible benefits for >>> >>> LilyPond's website and its ongoing maintenance do we expect to reap from >>> >>> a move to Blended as its content management system? >>> > >>> > Design update. >>> >>> So this content management system prescribes a particular design, or >>> makes implementing a particular design easier? Still unanswered. >>> > It looks better and attracts more users to the software. >>> >>> Last time I looked, users were not selecting their software by leafing >>> through random web pages until they find a generally good-looking one >>> and then being attracted to the software it advertises. >>> >>> At any rate, I wasn't really asking for advertising slogans here but >>> rather concrete examples of stuff that would improve under such a >>> change. > > I wrote the Blended system to fit all of the requirements for > redesigning the website (not documentation) for LilyPond. A nice side > effect was that I can use it for other things. Not addressing the request. Could you give concrete examples of stuff that would be expected to improve under a change of the content management system to Blended? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
