On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:45:58PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Hulin" <[email protected]> > To: "Phil Holmes" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 6:48 PM > Subject: Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055) > > >Implementation > > > ><tbs> by a grown-up who understands how the docs are compiled.
That's the sticking point. > My understanding was that there was a desire to index /foo and foo > as the same, and have a single index. You want to fix that, go > ahead. Yes. Note that this would require adding functionality to texinfo, and since I don't want to require CVS versions of software as part of our doc build, that will require a texinfo release, and there hasn't been any texinfo release since 2008 so that would require a lot of work on that side of things. Oh, and even if there _was_ a new texinfo release, we'd need to have a few rounds of bugfixing in texinfo and/or rewriting our docs so that they work on the new version of texinfo because probably a lot will have changed. Short answer: we're stuck with the current indices. No point having a policy discussion for a policy that can't possibly be implemented in less than 12 months. (even if texinfo had a release today, it would take time to sort out the bugs and get that stable version into linux distributions) If and when texinfo _is_ updated, and our docs _do_ compile in that version, we can have a policy discussion about what we'd like to see at that time. - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
