[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue 872 in lilypond: Changes split-page has broken images

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: Issue 872 in lilypond: Changes split-page has broken images
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:40:12 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:56:11PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> Le jeudi 05 novembre 2009 à 00:30 +0000, Graham Percival a écrit :
> > It seems to work.  I had to change all the @ref{} in the text, but
> > it looks fine now.
> Barring well-argumented opposition, I'm going to revert this and apply
> the patch below, as completely downcasing titles — node names are some
> kind of titles, they are used in Info as titles, at least — is really
> quite ugly.

oh, FFS.  Your solution is so ridiculously easy.  I want to go and
drunk myself unconscious (especially after discovering that the
online doc target is broken in 2.13.7).

... which would be perfectly normal behavior in Glasgow, if only I
drank alcohol.  Curses, foiled again!

(yes, please revert the lower-case patches from Jan and me, and
use yours)

> > > Renaming a directory should be a simple
> > > mv and M-x tags-search-replace.
> > 
> > NB: a simple replace **in the same directory**, no less.  Not some
> > kind of ../stepmake/stepmake/texinfo-targets.make or
> > ../doc-i8n3d-targets.maek
> What do you mean?

I'm complaining again about wanting to change something about the
docs, and needing to look in

Just ignore me.

> > Agreed -- but there's no /general dir in the output.
> I already pointed out that this scheme doesn't work for online target,
> as there is a conflict between MANUAL.html and MANUAL/index.html.  I'll
> undo the change that bring general.texi output one directory higher,
> unless you do so sooner.

No.  The solution is to move the docs one directory lower:
(or maybe docs-v2.13, or maybe v2.13... whatever)

I'll make a first pass at this on the weekend, and send a patch
here for discussion.

> > I'm open to renaming "general.tely", but nobody could think of a
> > better name last June or July when we were contemplating such a
> > change.
> We weren't contemplating this at all, we're arguing about technical
> issues more important than the name of the website sources.

I thought that Jan was complaining about the "general" name.

- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]