So in general I have the feeling that this doesn't bring us much, but just keeps adding more checks to our configure and more choices / configurations to test on a somewhat regular basis. I'm not really in favor.I disagree with that conclusion, but if you feel that we really, really must disable xetex support in favor of luatex, let's do it.
My 2cts: LuaTeX brings us closer to being relieved from the burden of littering the Texinfo markup with @/ in @code [1] (https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6275) so I like the idea of using it for the documentation on lilypond.org. On the other hand, most contributors (except those who want to fine-tune the typography, i.e. basically you, Werner) will want the doc build to be as fast as possible, so I'm not fond of using it by default. I would prefer a ./configure option. This also means that a newbie cannot unconsciously be using it and report problems that don't reproduce for others ("what's going on, I have the same version of pdfTeX as you"). Finally, the maintenance burden of supporting three different engines is a very real thing. You would like to do it for "philosophical reasons", but I haven't yet understood what philosophy there is behind this exactly. Please clarify. Thanks, Jean [1] Although another option would be to just not care ...
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
