"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: >> >> But it doesn't make sense to point VERSION_DEVEL to documentation that >> is actually older than that of 2.20, does it? >> >> I do not really know what is correct here with respect to our >> semi-automatic webpage update mechanism. I just remember that we had >> problems last time round. >> >> -- David Kastrup > > > I think it needs to point to documentation that actually exists, since > we won't be building for the development version. There's no reason > not to launch a 2.21 fairly soon afterwards, and the problem you're > citing would then go away.
The 2.21 release depends on merging the translation work back in. I probably should start with that already: we don't have many outstanding contributions there I guess. Too bad I never understood how git-rerere is supposed to work. On 2.21.0 the documentation translations will be outdated. That is expected. But they need to compile anyway. -- David Kastrup
