Re: branching stable/2.22?

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Sonntag, den 13.09.2020, 11:59 +0200 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 11:28 AM Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de> wrote:
> > > > > Similarly, if I change a documentation string in an SCM file like
> > > > > `define-markup-commands.scm`, the documentation doesn't get
> > > > > rebuilt, either.
> > > > 
> > > > I can look at reintroducing the SCM -> texi dependencies.
> > > 
> > > Please do so.  Due to the auto-generation process, it is far from
> > > trivial to find out which command has to be called.
> > 
> > Actually, I value faster incremental builds that sometimes does less
> > over wasting my time always regenerating the internals manual whenever
> > I happen to touch an SCM file. Just doing
> >  $ rm Documentation/out*/en/internals.texi
> > will update it, no need to remember any command.
> 
> I see the value of faster builds, but I think being correct is more
> important than being fast.

Being fully correct here means generating internals.itexi whenever
*something* in the lilypond binary changes - Scheme functions defined
in C++ also end up in there. That's basically on touching any file.

Ideally, we could make internals.itexi depend on the result of
$(top-build-dir)/lily/$(outdir)/lilypond and only generate a temporary
copy. If that is the same as before, nothing has to be updated. I've
seen this realized with some move-if-changed for other projects, but it
looked very hacky back then...

> What annoys me is that the default build creates the info docs, which
> aren't necessary for developing lilypond.

I guess that has to stay because we want distributions building from
the tarball to ship the info files to their users...

Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part