Re: GOP-PROP 12: keep master in ready-to-release state (probable decision)

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 03:03:46PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> But we still need to find a solution where I have a chance of getting
>> work done.
>
> dev/staging
>
> I just realized that I forgot to add this to the proposal.  I'll
> do that later tonight and send an updated version.
>
> Or better yet -- dev/lexer-fixes.  Suppose that (almost) all your
> work for the past 2 weeks went onto that branch.  You think you're
> done, so ask if it's ok to merge with master.  James tests it,
> sends you the output of "make doc" failing; you work a bit more,
> maybe revert something, then announce that you think it's working
> now.  James tests again -- and since this is a major merge, he
> tests a completely blank build dir, doing a full make doc, etc --
> and this time it passes.  Merge happens, git master doens't break,
> much celebrations by everybody.
>
>> Can we compromise on "make info" instead?
>
> No, because that doesn't compile any @lilypond examples.  Besides,
> "make info" is run during a normal "make" !

Wrong, and wrong.

> There are ways of speeding up the whole "make doc" process... we can
> probably cut the time in half by using a server, for example, since
> that avoids loading the guile libraries for every single @lilypond.
> OTOH, that would only work for hundreds of examples if we didn't have
> any memory leaks.  We could probably save another factor of two by
> using guile 2.0.

I think most of the time is spent in Ghostscript, anyway.  If we could
batch a lot of conversions into a single Ghostscript run, that would
likely help a lot.

-- 
David Kastrup