[scribus] Aligning frames

[Ken Springer]

On 1/4/17 7:26 AM, Gregory Pittman wrote:
> On 01/03/2017 10:06 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
>>
>> I've only done one other Scribus doc, and that was about a year ago.  As
>> I've posted questions and gotten answers, I've been reminded I'm just
>> going through the same frustrations now as I did then, and asked the
>> same questions.
>>
>
> If we might adopt your style of "help" for the project, I see that, on
> the basis of two documents, a year apart from each other, you have
> formed solid opinions on the various deficiencies of Scribus, which
> comes across as a litany of sorrows.

If you interpreted things as a "litany of sorrows", then you've 
misinterpreted everything.

There's been a year apart between documents because I had no reason to 
use Scribus in between.

Look at this from an automotive perspective...  Scribus is a Kenworth or 
Peterbilt with a 40' van.  Other software I use is like a Ford or Chevy 
pickup.  The things I've done only required a pickup, why would I use an 
over the road truck?

> The way Scribus gets improved is by someone taking the time to show some
> better way, or contribute better documentation (the wiki is wide open
> for contributions). Because I liked the project, I gradually became
> involved with it in spite of working full-time. I don't think anyone
> exists who doesn't have a significant part of their daily lives which is
> simply wasted, and you can choose to do what you wish with that time or
> continue to waste it.

All I can do is point out what seem to be weaknesses, nothing more.  I 
have neither the technical expertise nor skills to do otherwise.  Not to 
mention taking the time to point those weaknesses out, when I could be 
doing something else.

> At this point, we can only note your opinions, and consider them until
> they fade from our memories. See you in a year I guess.

Note them and consider them, that's all I can ask for.  Forgetting them 
may be the developers mistake.

A few years ago, I filed some bugs with the Libre Office group.  There 
were others that agreed the issues needed to be fixed.  But the 
developers said the bugs weren't important.  Not important my ass.  LOL 
The problems were important to me, they were features I wanted to use 
but couldn't.

At the same time, there was a group that was pushing for LO to be more 
aggressive to get people to switch from MS Office to LO.  If you want 
people to switch, you have to be as good or *better* than the program 
that's being replaced.

I don't know if there was a perspective change or what at LO, but about 
a year ago I got automated emails informing me the bugs were now being 
fixed.  :-)

About 10 years ago, Munich, Germany switched from Windows and Office to 
Linux and LO.  They are now going back, but I honestly suspect part of 
their problem is Munich wanted a custom version of Linux instead of 
choosing an "off the shelf" version.

If the developers want to continue in the same vein, that's fine.  But 
ignoring the ways others do the same thing may put your project in 
peril.  I just pointed out to Christoph how much easier it is to align 
frames in Serif's Page Plus than it is in Scribus.

You saw this in the US Presidential election primaries.  There were 17 
or 18 candidates that played by the old rules, and one (Trump) that did 
not.  And look what happened there.

An automotive analogy would be the mechanic who will only use hand tools 
for disassembly and reassembly of an engine.  But another mechanic has 
switched to easier methods, aka power tools.  All other things being 
equal, which mechanic do you think will be the most successful?

You can look at what I say as whining or what ever.  But what I want is 
to see Scribus improve and get better.  And doing things the "old way" 
doesn't always give you an end product that is an improvement and 
better.  :-)

-- 
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 49.0.1
Thunderbird 45.3.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
      and it's gone!"