Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

[James]

On 01/02/14 23:23, Eluze wrote:
> Federico Bruni-5 wrote
> > 2014/2/1 Trevor Daniels <
> > address@hidden
> > >
> >
> > > James wrote Saturday, February 01, 2014 10:51 AM
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:
> > > > > add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth
> > > an
> > > > > entry in the tracker!?
> > > > A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the
> > > tracker
> > > > with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
> > > > where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to
> > > make
> > > > a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I
> > > don't
> > > > think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.
> > > I agree.
> > Whoever takes this task, please consider also @cindex \bookpart:
> why - they both (\book and \bookpart) *are* in both indexes, aren't they?!
> (I don't know what @cindex means)
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor-big-page.html#syntax-survey

Scroll down to 'indexing'

James