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

[Eluze]

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)

Eluze



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/redundant-entries-in-the-indexes-are-confusing-and-lessening-the-clarity-tp158696p158731.html
Sent from the Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.