Re: mergin web/ with master/

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op zaterdag 06-06-2009 om 03:14 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
Percival:

> Translators *do* need to get all of lily.  At least, they need to
> get the docs (they translate this after the webpages, right?).

That's a good point.  I was thinking, translation of docs is 
an exception, but that's probably less so these days... :-)

> I've toyed with the idea of splitting off the docs into a separate
> repo, but then it becomes much harder -- new features and syntax
> changes would require patches to both code/ and docs/.  We
> definitely don't want to go that way!

No, surely not.

> I admit that having a tiny repo to clone is a decent way for
> translators to get started quicker... but given that they need to
> switch repos after 10-20 hours of work anyway, I don't think this
> is a great saving.

Okay...

> > What is it that bothers you tracking an additional repo?
> 
> To be up-to-date, I need to do a "git pull origin" 

You should only need

   git pull -r

please *do* use -r, otherwise our repo is full of silly "Merged brange
foo from .."

> in two separate directories.  New (or relatively new) contributors need to 
> create
> separate directories to get all the source.  Etc.

Is it so hard to

    git config --global url.git+ssh://git.sv.gnu.org/srv/git/.insteadof gnu:

    git clone gnu:lilypond
    git clone gnu:lilypond-web  # real soon now (unless your proposal :-)

?  Create new directories, I don't understand?

> People who don't have newweb/ probably won't download the new git
> repo just to fix a typo.  People who have never gotten newweb/
> definitely won't download it just to fix a typo.

> Perfect example: Jonathan.  He's currently the main "small doc
> fix" guy, but he doesn't have newweb/ and never has, so any fixes
> to the website waits for other people to do.

Okay, I see.  Well, we agree that the current setup is really
bad.  I suppose Jonathan could be taught how to handle a separate
lilypond-web repo?  Another branch within the main repo, like
we have now, that's really confusing and scary.

> If you want, I could crack down on this.  Massively crack down.
> ...
> Come on, tell me to crack down.  You know you want to.  :)

bring it on!

> Special warning: Jonathan, we need to talk.

> I just figured that a repo should have its own instructions.
> That's not necessary, though.

Indeed, whether we have web/README in a separate repo, branch,
or main repo, it should probably exist, but point to the CG?
Let's do that asaftt (as soon as anyone finds the time).

> It's partly psychological.

> In general, I wanted to start thinking about the website as part
> of the docs 

This makes a lot of sense.  I'm starting to agree with your
proposal.

> I'm still not certain that it's worth doing it in texinfo.  Many
> projects these days distribute html files as docs, so we might go
> with a relatively small set of html files, plus the pdf/info/html
> "general info" docs (most of the current website), plus the normal
> docs.

...but this choice is not necessarily bound to the one/two repo
issue.  One repo would enable us to experiment with using texinfo
here and there...  I'm not sure that would help.  Although having
everything texinfo might be easier for translators, and the new
css seems to show most anything is possible.

> I don't believe that 1Gb figure.  My lilypond is 488 megs, with
> all code built, and the English docs built.  My guess is that the
> source alone clocks in at 150-200 megs.
> 
> Yes, that's still much more than the 30 meg newweb/ by itself, but
> if the translators are going to end up working on the docs
> eventually, they might as well get it all at the beginning.

Looked into this.  Git has now a history horizon.

12:51:09 address@hidden:~
$ git clone --depth=10 gnu:lilypond
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/janneke/lilypond/.git/
remote: Counting objects: 158432, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (40495/40495), done.
remote: Total 158432 (delta 133195), reused 141201 (delta 117522)
Receiving objects: 100% (158432/158432), 52.62 MiB | 168 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (133195/133195), done.
12:57:15 address@hidden:~
$ du -sh lilypond lilypond/.git
84M     lilypond
58M     lilypond/.git

which means we only need to get 84 MB.  Problem is, pulling from
savannah only goes at ~150KB/s here...

> True.  Although we could make the same argument about doc writers.

Why is that?

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
Avatar®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl    | http://lilypond.org