On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 11:54 PM Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 10:38:50PM +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > is there any other function of web.texi besides producing the > > lilypond.org website? I would like to get rid of the "-D web_version" > > distinction, that is making web_version always be true for the web > > document. Is there any reason to not do this? > > IIRC there was an argument that all lilypond docs should be > available via info(1) and pdfs, and some parts of the website > qualified as "docs". The general intro to our manuals, for > example. Related commits: > ac3d9e3f836a56977ca09f89e7ffcfc189711743 > a060fc94b65dbc25a7e1ec20f2f79a58036a2546 > (general.texi was later renamed to web.texi) > > The argument on the mailing list was probably in 2009, although > just possibly it was late 2008 instead. I think that my original > idea was to just produce the html, while the person(s) who wanted > to have all docs available offline where you, Jan, John Mandereau, > and/or David Kastrup. (It was definitely an emacs user!) > A few months later, I was glad that I lost that argument, as it > provided a "starting point" to the dozen or so pdf manuals. > > I'm not aware of the current state & usage of lilypond docs, so I > have no position on whether it's worth keeping the "full offline > capability". If there's a serious desire to make web.texi > HTML-only, then it might even be worth adding that to the tarball > of pdfs (if those are still being distributed).
Just for clarity, I'm not against having web.texi as an info file or PDF file. It's just that I want to get rid of the special casing of web_version, which (when switched) off produces a doc with less links. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanw...@gmail.com - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen