Hello, Julien Lepiller <jul...@lepiller.eu> skribis:
> Le Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:51:37 +0200, > Miguel <rosen644...@gmail.com> a écrit : [...] >> El Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:30:26 +0200 >> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> escribió: >> > Also, I don’t actually use the ./bootstrap script. :-) >> >> Currently it is only a call to autoreconf -fvi, but it's there for a >> reason, isn't it? It’s there mostly because people are used to having such a file, but I like the fact that it does nothing magical. > I actually agree with Miguel here. The phony target would not allow us > to update the manual. It's probably a matter of preferences, but I > prefer an up to date manual with some English sentences than a fully > translated but outdated manual. I wouldn't use a manual that could > refer to an older version. I agree that up-to-date is preferable. > You will only be bothered when new translations appear, in which case > you'll have to run ./bootstrap again, but on the other hand, you will > never be bothered by *.texi files being changed all the time. So what would one have to do when preparing a new release? Presumably nothing because the up-to-date texi files would be checked in? IOW, running ./bootstrap is something what would matter primarily to translators, is that correct? Thanks, Ludo’.
