From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pAFAL8tK030940 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:21:08 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlIBANo7wk5KfVK2kGdsb2JhbABDhQGjFIFNCCIBAQEBCQkNBxQEIYFyAQEBAwESAg9bCwsLDwImAgIiEgEFAQ4BDSEah2CdNQqLGpIvgTCFP4F/gRYElDCNTT2DcQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,514,1315173600"; d="scan'208";a="119043942" Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com ([74.125.82.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 15 Nov 2011 11:21:03 +0100 Received: by mail-wy0-f182.google.com with SMTP id 23so8239494wyf.27 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:21:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.106.104 with SMTP id gt8mr30045330wib.6.1321352463409; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:21:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.100.39 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:21:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4EC23851.3070209@inria.fr> References: <4EC23851.3070209@inria.fr> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:21:03 +0100 Message-ID: From: Andrej Bauer To: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How to fail to install Ocaml in 18 steps > I completely agree that it does not have to be that hard. > > On the bright side, we are currently working hard on improving the > Eclipse support for OCaml, and we should be able to release an improved > plugin in a few months. > > We also plan to release Windows installers for the next versions of > OCaml, to continue the great work started by Jonathan Protzenko. Yes, please don't take my report as whining (only), but just as a user experience report, to see how things go wrong. I think it is particularly hard to get things right because there is no single place which describes the correct procedure. Some people will start with the Eclipse plugin and won't realize they need to install Ocaml separately. Some people will install Ocaml, but won't read instructions and won't install Mingw (like my student). Suppose you do it the logical way: 1. Install Ocaml. 2. Install OcaIDE. Then you'll still end up installing Mingw and later Cygwin, when Cygwin with Mingw selected was all that was needed. The Ocaml web site, or wherever Google sends people who type in "install ocaml", should have _unambigious_ set of instructions. No ifs and thens and "Level 1" and "Level 2", and "source code or binary installer" and "you need Mingw but you don't really because you can have Microsoft stuff as well, and if you want 64-bit then Mingw is no good, and there will be further surprises when you get to OcaIDE, we lied about Mingw and Microsoft stuff, you will need cygwin anyhow, etc." People expect: 1. Install these prerequisites. 2. Install this stuff. 3. Install that stuff. 4. It's working. 5. Somewhere at the bottom of the instructions there is a link to "alternative ways of installing" and "troubleshooting". If you make them decide whether they want Mingw or Microsoft right at the beginning, it's already a lost battle. If you list installation from source code before you list the binary installer, that's a big mistake. People who want and know how to install from source will find the source code even if you hide it from them. The other 99% will just get confused. A good example is how Linux distributions have evolved from "it takes a week to install Linux" to "burn this CD and reboot". They used to list 27 kernel images with and without drivers and with and without X windows etc, and they made the user select the right one. Now they're reduced to "Intel 32", "Intel 64" and something else I never pay attention to. We're somewhere in the "it takes a week to install Ocaml" era, I am afraid. I just realized that the documentation for OcaIDE failed to install, aparently the relevant stuff could not be downloaded. We had to disable that. So that's 19 steps. With kind regards, Andrej