I have been in the situation of downloading the sources to a package only to look at its Texinfo manual, but finding it hard to build it. Texinfo manuals often include generated files such as version.texi that are only produced by the package build process (e.g. after running "configure", which may take a long time or have other problems).
I wonder if in many cases the manual would be nearly all OK to look at if missing @include files only gave an warning, not an error. With Texinfo's own manual, if I comment out the "@include version.texi" line there are only warnings about undefined flags, but the rest of the manual is fine. I expect that this would be the case for most manuals and there is not anything really complicated going on with included files. Does anybody have any comments about my proposal to change missing @include files to give only a warning?
