lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Big web page


From: Phil Holmes
Subject: Re: Big web page
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 12:32:59 +0100

----- Original Message ----- From: "Janek Warchoł" <address@hidden>
To: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
Cc: "Devel" <address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: Big web page


2011/9/23 Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
You know, I'm wondering if this serves any purpose. It's a humungous thing that takes an age to load and display, and for a long time has had a load of
missing images, bad links, etc. No-one complained much and no-one really
seemed to notice. Yet we lose the images on web-examples and get a user
report same day.

Given the shenanigans needed to create it, might it make sense to retire it?

+1

Janek


So - going on comments concerning GOP, we have had one support, one comment to the effect that someone once objected, and no-one objecting. Please could we consider this as a serious proposal, and if anyone thinks we need to keep web-big-page.html please say so, and why.

I have discovered another reason for getting rid of it - it's almost impossible to test any work done to change the way it's created (BTW - this is not a bleat about an error I made earlier, it's something I've realised as I documented make website). The command "make website" doesn't really make the website. lilypond.org has lots more content on it - all the manuals, for example, the images, etc. "make website" doesn't even create web-big-page.html. "make website" really only makes the html pages in web.texi. On my system, those things (manuals, pictures, web-big-page.html) are only created by the much slower make doc. So, if you want to check web-big-page.html you have to make doc. But - not only is this slower, it also uses different scripts from make website, so the pages are different from those made by "make website". So you can't use "make website" to test web-big-page.html since it doesn't make it, and you can't use "make doc" because the process is different.

So let's lose it....

--
Phil Holmes





reply via email to

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