Valentin Villenave wrote: > I did do my homework and have a look at the texinfo > manual, but I thought this was just escaped characters. > Either way, the syntax wasn't quite consistent since there > were some refs with @/ "escaping", others without and this > wasn't mentioned in the CG at all. (dots are even > "escaped" in some @uref as well!)
Keep in mind that these texinfo @-commands may not mean what you think they mean (see @. for example) : http://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/html_node/Command-List.html >> So either I'm missing something, or something else is >> going on. Was this change discussed on -devel? If so, >> somehow I missed it. > > No, I did consider discussing it but since the diff was > almost 400Ko I couldn't send it so I just pushed it on the > translations/ branch. Can you post to Rietveld? That's the preferred code sharing location. > Ok, what do we do now? We could revert my commit but it > will leave the docs source code with the inconsistency I > was trying to address... Another (possibly more clever?) > solution is to remove all @/ before file extensions, so > that such line breaks as what you mentioned can't occur > anymore. Personally, I wouldn't want @/ anywhere in a @file, but I think the right thing to do is to revert the patch and start a discussion about what our policy should be for this case. Other developers will have their own ideas too, and we should try to agree on something before making such a change. - Mark _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
