Re: GDP: read the 2.11 docs

[Valentin Villenave]

2007/9/11, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden>:

>    if there is any regtests which is useful as documentation and there
>    is no corresponding snippet in LSR
>
> Although I agree that would be nice, currently that statement is
> ridiculous.  It is way too early for that?  We have about 600
> regression tests, and there are only about 220 lsr snippets.  I agree
> that newbies should not look at the regression test, but if you shut
> out power-users from the regression test, they'll miss about 400
> features?  We will have all sorts of questions: Can lily do this?

You have a good point. However this shouldn't prevent us from keeping
adding the regtests to the LSR (IMO, every regtest can potentially be
useful as documentation; however since they're very short and minimal,
some have to be merged or developed).

> > How about, for example, http://lilypond.org/web/devel/
>
> That page could serve as a frontend to different versions, just like
>
>     http://lilypond.org/web/documentation

This would be very cool; I recently wished the "developers area" could
be more developed...

> The regression tests are (as the name implies) hard linked to a
> specific lilypond version.  They are built as part of the
> documentation (or `make web') build, so there should still be an index
> page in the documentation, besides Documentation/index.html.in, say
> Documentation/devel.html.in?

This is equally possible, and logical. Graham, what do you think?

> It's also is an amazing advertisement for lily's features?  How is
> a user supposed to report a bug or do a feature request without
> having access to the regression tests?

I've recently been praising for feature pages too... About every
open-source (or proprietary) software has a "Features" link on its
home page. This could be a place for both nice, pedagogical, features
pages, and a "Complete features list" link to the current regtests,
couldn't it?

Regards,
Valentin