On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > What the bloody mao have you been smoking, Valentin?
Hi Graham, nice to see you too :) > We do *not* want > info about download a tarball as the first section in CG 2. In fact, > we don't want it anywhere in CG 2 at all. If people are desperate for > this, it's in CG 3.3. Actually, I began writing CG doc for regtests, and tried to put myself in the shoes of an hypothetical contributor who would want to build the regtests, but without installing git. (BTW: It would make sense (to me, at least) to put CG3 /before/ CG2. Building a program from its source code is a common thing for *nix users, and since we've removed it from AU, it's a pity that this information is somehow buried in the CG.) > More generally, we don't need people randomly changing the "finished" > parts of the CG unless they know the decisions that went into the > current format. We've had hours of discussion about CG 1, 2, and 3. > 3 isn't "finished", but I would still hesitate to make large changes > to it without consulting other people. In my mind, this wasn't a "large change". But I do get your point about people changing things when you don't expect it. Cheers, Valentin _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
