[Digikam-users] Re: DigiKam compilation instructions

[Hevï Guy]

On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 08:23 -0900, Jim Dory wrote: 

> Point is that I don't see how the developers of Digikam can be held
> responsible for the lousy package systems of all distributions.

Oops. Sorry if somehow that is what I had implied. On the contrary, I
applaud dK's developers for their great work. Specifically, for me and
those in my situation, it's the Ubuntu packagers who are making things
difficult.


> I've
> also built from SVN using the very thorough cook-book-like
> instructions given by Gilles or a partner on the website when I needed
> functionality of that latest development release. I can see that a
> newb could have trouble there though.

Well, that's just the point: It is indeed something that presents us
with trouble. Hence the requirement for a hamster-readable cook-book ;-)







> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Hevï Guy <heviiguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> 
> > This is the crux: Many of us are mere photographers rather than programming
> > experts. I'm sure that I speak for most people in my situation when I say
> > that I am very appreciative of the effort that's put into developing this
> > great program. However, we're also very frustrated that in order to use it,
> > we have to compile not only the core program but also its dependencies.
> > Granted, there are instructions available on the DigiKam site but, they are
> > somewhat disjointed and incomplete. They take for granted that the
> > non-coders will know what is missing and are thus able to fill-in the
> > blanks.
> >
> > I'm not asking to be given something that we can install by the click of one
> > button (although it would be nice!). All I'm asking for is that if we have
> > to compile a bunch of stuff, a road map (a detailed road map) is provided.
> > If anybody is willing to do this, pretend that you're writing it for a two
> > year-old child. Then the instructions should be easy enough for us to
> > follow. No wait: I'm sure that any two year-old living with a serious coder
> > would be more capable than me. A better idea would be to write the
> > instructions as if your hamster is to read it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20110126/aa77bc8a/attachment.html>