I've got waf buliding contributor .html and .pdf in the dev/gperciva branch. I was pleasantly surprised to discover that waf supported a --targets= command-line, so we can specific an individual manual to build. I'm less happy that this appears to ignore the "after=foo" check, so none of the dependencies are checked. At the moment, I remain unconvinced that waf is actually any good.
Actually, I suppose we could add a custom command-line option for building specific manuals (*with* their dependencies), so I guess this isn't such a big deal. Bottom line: if we actually want waf, it can be done within two weeks. At least, the non-translated stuff can be done within two weeks. I'm *not* going to screw around with the translations. I know I said the same about waf, but I got so pissed off about all the fluffing around that I'll take it over. But I seriously don't mind making releases without any translations whatsoever, so if anybody *does* want translations, they'd better be willing to work on the build system once the main english docs are working in waf. *if* we want waf. As I said, I remain unconvinced. - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
