Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > Let me be clear. > - are the info docs not finished? yes. > - are the pdf, html, etc. not finished? yes. > - did I completely underestimate the pain in doing ANYTHING with > the lilypond build process? yes. > - would I have completely changed almost everybody about the past > summer if I had realized how much trouble it was to change the > build system? sweet mao yes. > > That said, the info docs are a fairly minor concern at the moment, > given the mess that the rest of the system is.
Defending the status quo would appear to be a waste of time, then. Regardless of the state of messiness, however, I repeat my contention that the principal project web page is not suitable as top level documentation anchor for a specific version. The current document named "lilypond.info" is the wrong choice, even after fixing all brokenness. I don't think that an info version of this, the project web page, would serve a useful purpose, so I think it sensible to completely forget about "improving" its info aspect (or even its "standalone HTML documentation" aspect). -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
