Re: documentation formats

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:39:26PM -0500, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Graham,
>
>> If we did stuff in plain html, we'd lose the pdf docs.  If we did
>> stuff in plain latex, we'd lose the html docs (without a lot of
>> tweaking).  Both would lose the info docs, which IMO wouldn't be
>> terrible, but some people seem to like.
>
> I don't even know what the "info docs" are, so IMO...?

Have you heard of man?  As in
   man ls
?  it works on OSX.

info is basically "man on steroids".  It might work on OSX; I
can't remember.  Try
   info gcc
and see if you get anything.


> For the record, I only want to do this documentation stuff for three  
> reasons:
>   1. Get my build system in place (i.e., learn git, get dependencies  
> installed, etc.);

Ok.  The Contributor's Guide is definitely the place for that.

>   2. Satisfy [i.e. shut up] the people who say that the docs are what's 
> keeping them/Lilypond/worldpeace from advancing; and,

Ah good, so it's not just a one-time website thing.  :)
*cough*  website / general.pdf / lilypond-general.info

>   3. Get comfy enough with the whole Lily-dev process to "graduate" 
> (i.e., fix some real bugs and add some real features).

I'm fine with that.  I mean, I'll be sad to lose another doc
writer, but I have no problem with the docs as being somewhat of a
"training ground" before people "graduate".  As long as we have
something resembling a stream of newcomers to replace people who
graduate, at least...

Cheers,
- Graham