Re: CG source code as an archive

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Valentin Villenave
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Graham Percival
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> We do *not* want
>> info about download a tarball as the first section in CG 2.  In fact,
>> we don't want it anywhere in CG 2 at all.  If people are desperate for
>> this, it's in CG 3.3.
>
> Actually, I began writing CG doc for regtests, and tried to put myself
> in the shoes of an hypothetical contributor who would want to build
> the regtests, but without installing git.

Nobody should be building the regtests without installing git.
Developers need git.  Bug Squad people should look at the official
online regtests.

> (BTW: It would make sense (to me, at least) to put CG3 /before/ CG2.

No, because
1) the CG is not written sequentially
2) the CG is not supposed to be read sequentially
3) contributors need the source code before they can compile anything

> Building a program from its source code is a common thing for *nix
> users, and since we've removed it from AU, it's a pity that this
> information is somehow buried in the CG.)

"buried" ?!  It's the only thing in the right-hand box on:
    http://lilypond.org/website/source.html
How much simpler can you get?

Cheers,
- Graham