On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:28:50PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote: > Le vendredi 06 novembre 2009 à 19:43 +0000, Graham Percival a écrit : > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:14:27PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote: > > > I warmly, highly and definitely second doc/v2.xx (first value of xx will > > > be 14), which is clearer than having stable docs at toplevel or in /web, > > > > I'll agree if you're ok with a doc/stable/ symlink that points to > > doc/v2.xx/ > > I don't understand: this symlink already exists on lilypond.org, and > I've never requested to remove it. > > > > stable docs at toplevel -- think on all users that wait little time or > > > even sometimes a while before upgrading to the newest stable branch. > > > > I don't follow this statement? > > Do you use bookmarks in your web browser?
Oh, I see. Keeping it as an immediate forward rather than a regular symlink. Ok. > > I would also like the offline target of the docs to share this > > directory layout. (minus the "stable" symlink) > > I don't understand this, this is asking for complication. IMO the > directory munging should happen in www_post.py (or one of the modules it > uses), so it could be applied only for online target. I don't see the > point of trying to produce the final structure directory in WWW-1 and > WWW-2 building stages, as the docs produced in this stage are not very > usable anyway (think of broken images in splitted HTML docs). I was talking about fixing this in the new waf buildsystem, if we switch to it. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
