Re: Examples (for the web site and complete scores) status

[Graham Percival]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:43:12PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Op donderdag 06-08-2009 om 00:08 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham
> Percival:
> 
> > IMO, there are two kinds of examples here.
> 
>   3) benchmarking/full feature examples/developer's/user's smoke tests
> 
>     input/mutopia/F.Schubert/morgenlied.ly
>     input/mutopia/J.S.Bach/baerenreiter-sarabande.ly
>     input/mutopia/typograhpy-demo.ly

Then these can go in input/regresssion/ ... as it happens, I
already added typography-demo.ly because some files in regression/
relied on it.  They're easily "rescued" from the 2.13.5 tag.


>     Remove mutopia
>     Remove examples
> 
> First, these commit messages tell me nothing more than
> the diff itself: stuff is being junked.  It would be interesting
> to know why it is junked, why this does not remove any interesting
> information, or where copies can be found.

Good point; I should have added a link to the mailist discussion
about such removals.

> We are junking things like
> 
>     -  texidoc = "The B\\\"arenreiter edition of the Cello Suites is the
>     -most beautifully typeset piece of music in our collection of music (we
> 
> are you sure you want to just junk these things?  I for one would
> consider it a very bad regression if this baerenreiter sarabande
> example would ever compile to something less beautiful than it
> does now.

Then it surely belongs in the regtests.

> If you meant to move some of these, it is /much/ nice to preserve
> history, rather than copy or later re-introduce [ie, revert these
> commits and do a move].

Other than typography-demo.ly, I did not intend to move the files;
I didn't realize that they were part of an unofficial set of
regression tests.  But I have no problem with un-deleting them,
moving them to the regression/ dir.

As a technical git question, would this require reverting the
entire "deleting..." commit, doing a git mv, then another git rm
for whatever's left?


> Also, I'm not sure why the totally obvious input/example-*.ly
> had to go.  This seems to me as being such a nice-no-need-for-
> documentation-nobrain place to get going?

It's not linked in the new website.  We've had *months* to look
comment on the new website, and in particular we've had virtually
nothing happening for the past 5-6 weeks.

If there's a particularly nice example, it either goes:
- Documentation/general/examples/
  (if it's an "advertizing" example)
- Documentation/snippets/
  (if it's a "learning / documentation" example)
- input/regression/
  (if it's for developers)

> [and/or some other files from input/].  Why does this have
> to change, and why did this happen without any mentioning
> of what the new mantra is like?

I've mentioned "cleaning up input/" a few times, and in particular
I discussed the above separation of Documentation/ from input/.
By this point, I thought that everybody who was interested in that
discussion had already seen it 2 or 3 times.


It might be useful to separate "hey, what if we did XYZ" -devel
discussions from "I have this plan, I will do XYZ, this is your
last chance to complain" -devel discussions.  I know that the idea
of a separate mailist wasn't well-received, so what about having a
subject-line tag like [PROPOSAL] or [LAST CHANCE] ?

We'd need to make sure that we don't overuse such things, but
there have been a few times that a relatively major change caught
people unaware.

Cheers,
- Graham