[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: CG source code as an archive

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: CG source code as an archive
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 19:16:49 +0100

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 5/27/10 11:55 AM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Nobody should be building the regtests without installing git.
>> Developers need git.  Bug Squad people should look at the official
>> online regtests.
> For developers, the primary information on regtests should be in
> Contributor's 8, IMO.


> Do we need a section in Contributor's 8 that addresses Bug Squad use of the
> regression tests?

aha, I was confused about 7 Issues vs. 8 Regressions.  ok, this makes
things easier and harder.  One solution is to put all the bug
squad-related regtest discussion in 7, then add links between both
chapters with explanations of what should go where... but this feels
like it's getting icky.  We could probably improve this by
reorganizing these chapters somewhat.

I can't take the time to plan this out myself today, but I'll look at
suggestions tomorrow.

>> "buried" ?!  It's the only thing in the right-hand box on:
>> How much simpler can you get?
> Why does the link got to 3.5, instead of to 3?

Because when I wrote it, the node called "Compiling LilyPond" *was* 3.
 When the nodes were renamed, nobody checked to see if that renaming
would mess up any existing links.

James: make the website source page link to the top of chapter 3 in
the CG, not 3.5.

- Graham

reply via email to

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