[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: What's the deal with info documentation images? |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:29:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 08:36:33AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Well, yes. FIXMEs generally aren't impressive. The FIXMEs will
> > definitely be dealt with. The images might be dealt with, if
> > somebody deals with them.
>
> But previously (info "(lilypond)") lead to useful top-level information.
> Currently it leads to a chaotic ensemble of FIXMEs, side remarks only
> relevant for web pages,
Update: aha, now I see what you were talking about... I'd
forgotten all the direntry stuff for the docs. I just happened to
come across it by accident while I was re-working the main page of
NR.
Yes, this will be fixed before 2.13.5.
Cheers,
- Graham
- What's the deal with info documentation images?, David Kastrup, 2009/08/27
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, Graham Percival, 2009/08/27
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, David Kastrup, 2009/08/27
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, Graham Percival, 2009/08/27
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, David Kastrup, 2009/08/28
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, Graham Percival, 2009/08/28
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, David Kastrup, 2009/08/29
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, Graham Percival, 2009/08/29
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?, David Kastrup, 2009/08/29
- Re: What's the deal with info documentation images?,
Graham Percival <=