Hello, On Wed 10 Jul 2024 at 06:45pm +02, Aymeric Agon-Rambosson wrote:
> I was not aware of this idea of preferred source for > modification. Nonetheless, I do not think it is that obvious that the .org > file is the preferred source for modification. If it was, why ship the .texi > file at all ? Because regenerating the .texi is hard and many upstreams care much less than Debian about rebuilding everything than source. > Most commits that modify one file also modify the other in the same > way. When they don't, sometimes you have typos corrected first in the > .org file, then in the .texi file in a later commit, but sometimes > also the opposite. > > Do we absolutely have to declare one or the other exclusively the preferred > source for modification ? > > But if we insist on declaring the .org file the preferred source for > modification, I could also solve the .texi regeneration bug, but only > later(TM). We don't have to make a declaration: we have to determine the truth. If you were going to make complex edits you would always fix it in the .org and regenerate the .texi, right? You wouldn't manually edit both. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
