[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
the "separate, but integrated" website proposal
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
the "separate, but integrated" website proposal |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:13:12 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
My apologies for being unclear in the past. (and my advanced
apologies for being unclear in the future, although hopefully I
won't be unclear about this specific issue)
The web-gop branch now contains lilypond-web-git-repo/. This is
my pretend/proposed separate repo for a "staging area" of web
stuff. I think it would live as
git://git.sv.gnu.org/lilypond-web.git
but that's kind-of up to the Savannah crew. (other projects have
multiple repos; we'd do whatever they normally do for multiple
repos)
Details are in the ADD-TO-CG.txt file, but as a brief summary:
- nobody edits texinfo files in this repo. They are imported
via scripts/update-imported.sh from the
unstable/current/head/master lilypond branch.
(currently the URL points to web-gop because the texinfo files
aren't in master yet)
- the website can be built without lilypond, or even texinfo
installed. All it needs it texi2html (perl).
I believe this satisfies a number of requirements:
- we have a set of integrated docs for tarballs (i.e.
lilypond-general.texi -> lilypond.texi in the main branch)
- normal contributors can easily work on website text
(i.e. Jonathan could add another famous lilypond performance
to our Introductions->Productions page (on master) without
changing branches/repos)
- normal users cannot screw up the official, uploaded, web page.
(a dedicated developer needs to import the latest changes from
master and review them, before pushing them to the lilypond-web
repo)
Yes, this introduces a slight delay -- after Jonathan adds the
performance, somebody (possibly even him) needs to review that
change in the separate branch. But I think that's an
acceptable delay; we won't have many time-critical issues.
My only uncertainty with this proposal is that I'm not certain how
this affects the cross-references. I'm hopeful that since the
texinfo files are the same in master/ and the web repo, it won't
be hard to make the links on the uploaded website point to the doc
links.
(if there's no better way of doing it, I could even make a python
script to replace links like @ref{Learning manual} with
@uref{docs/2.12/learning-manual/index.html, Learning manual}.)
Cheers,
- Graham
- the "separate, but integrated" website proposal,
Graham Percival <=