On 30-Jan-05, at 7:38 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:*** The Lilypond Snippet Repository ***
Essentially this is input/test/ done properly? Sounds great! :)
* Perhaps you can work together with Graham to copy snippets from
the manual. If the LSR is a success, we can drop the more esoteric
examples from the manual.
I was going to be moving some of the more esoteric stuff back into input/test/ , anyway.
* I suspect that you could import the input/{test,regression}/
directory wholesale.
input/test/ yes. In addition, I propose that after we've got input/test/ in the new DB, we remove it. And re-organize the whole input/ area. IMO the only thing we should keep is input/regression/ (and maybe stuff in input/no-notation/ that's used for regression tests.
Obviously we'll need to make a Documentation/user/input/ directory for the stuff in input/test/ that's used in the docs, but that'll still improve the organization.
* is there a way to condense the DB into an file/package, both
for offline viewing?
Oh, wait you mentioned that already.
I would make this a priority. The only thing that input/test/ has right now (that the DB) doesn't is the ability to be used offline.
Now that I don't have a 'net connection at home, I've become much more interested in offline documentation. :)
* Maybe it would be a good idea to have separate snippet DB for each
branch (ie. a 2.4 and 2.6 database.). It is possible to run
multiple versions of Lily alongside eachother. If you can't make
it work, that is a serious bug, and I will gladly work with you to
make it work
Wouldn't be ok to just have one branch (for the current stable) ? When a new stable branch is almost ready, converting the DB can be a good test for convert-ly. :)
We could freeze the old DB before doing that, and keep that version available (like the docs for 2.2), but IMO there's no need to keep an editable, compiled-every-night, version of a snippet repository for 2.2 (or 2.0, or 2.4 once 2.6 comes out).
* If I understand you correctly, you run untrusted .ly snippets
unattended? In that case, I hope you are running lilypond with
--safe, preferably sandboxed/chrooted. It is possible to do
One alternative is that you don't run new .ly snippets unattended -- a user contributes a new snippet, and it waits for a few {hours, days} until you look at it to ok it. I can't see this site being such a haven for activity that this is unworkable for you. And this lets you make sure that the new snippets are short/informative enough to be good snippets.
Cheers, - Graham
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
