Il giorno mer 7 dic 2016 alle 8:01, Graham Percival
<gra...@percival-music.ca> ha scritto:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 06:03:28PM +0000, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 12/5/16 10:28 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Graham Percival"
<lilypond-devel-bounces+c_sorensen=byu....@gnu.org on behalf of
gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote:
>The website *is* tied to the documentation. That decision was
>made in 2009, and the reasons are just as valid today.
What does it mean? That website and documentation must be generated
with the same tool?
Which are the valid reasons for this?
I believe you when you say this. But I am having a hard time
finding a
record of the decision. I expected to find it in the CG under
Administrative Policies or under Website work. I couldn't find it
either
place. Can you help me find a pointer to the discussion and/or the
decision rationale?
Good question, and I still don't have a good answer. This was
before we started keeping records of any decisions. The earliest
I found was this:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2008-12/msg00574.html
which didn't spark a whole lot of discussion. The current website
didn't start to become visible until late 2009.
Well, I cannot help quoting Reinhold enthusiasm about working on
texi2html:
Phew, thank god you are not asking me to write another .init file for
texi2html! I don't have many hairs left, so pulling out my hair is no
option
;-)
from:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2008-12/msg00596.html
You can imagine the enthusiasm of those coming afterwards...
I had a vague memory of a much more in-depth discussion, but
perhaps that was sometime in 2010 or 2011. I'll continue to trawl
through the archives to see if there's more info.
I don't think that links to previous discussions are _so_ important.
I'd be curious to know the valid reasons.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
