Re: Doc build hanging (with memory leak?)

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 14/05/12 14:15, David Kastrup wrote:
> They are treated by the bug squad picking up the suggestion and filing
> it in the issue problem.
>
> If someone suggested to you that they will refuse doing that, that
> someone was not giving you correct information.

OK. :-)

To be fair, reconsidering things, I wonder if the suggestion to go via Rietveld 
was simply because it was assumed that if I know git and TeXinfo, I'd have no 
problem with Rietveld either.

> Yes, it is demotivating.  But you are shooting the messenger in this
> case.  If nobody goes through all the make documentation and build
> scripts and rewrites them, the dependencies are not there for making the
> process faster.
>
> It turns out that, unless I am mistaken, somebody more or less did that.
> But he did not, as far as I am aware, start out from a better informed
> state than you did.

Yes, I noticed that as I was preparing my patch.  It was very nice to see. :-)

One of the frustrations on that occasion a year ago was that I would have been 
quite likely on my own initiative to see if I could do anything, _if_ I hadn't 
been treated to the lecture.

> If you consider the problems in the LilyPond code base as a personal
> insult, you are not likely to have much fun.

It's never the problems in the _code base_ -- they're a challenge, not an 
insult!

> Have you considered the possibility that he was simply telling you the
> truth?

At the time it didn't seem that way.  But I'm prepared to believe that was in 
fact the case and I misinterpreted it.

Might be a nice moment to see what I can do about that long-dormant doc work. 
:-)