Move toward more standard tarball names, ship HTML documentation

[nalimilan]

See #9977 and commit messages.

The first commit simply a adds new names to prepare the deprecation/transition; light-source-dist will eventually become dist. The second commit builds and installs HTML docs, but also ships them in the tarballs. It seems to work in my tests, but you should really check this is correct.

I'm not very happy about the copy/paste from light-source-dist to full-source-dist. Is there any simple solution in with Makefiles?

[tkelman]

to fix the appveyor failure you'll need to cherry-pick b36966f, and maybe some of the other commits from #9554 as well

edit: nevermind i'll just commit the obvious ones to master

[tkelman]

I committed the fixes to master and restarted the build here so now the docs can build on appveyor, but it takes about a minute per build. Can the $(build_docdir): doc/_build/html dependency be changed instead to install: doc/_build/html ?

[nalimilan]

I've rebased and moved building the docs to the install target. Appears to work fine with both light-source-dist and full-source-dist.

[tkelman]

I like it, though I do think light-source-dist and full-source-dist should reuse the common lines of code. Maybe something like

light-source-dist.tmp1:
    <all common lines of code except the line that creates the tarball,
    and the line that adds a prefix to the paths>

light-source-dist: light-source-dist.tmp1
    <add prefix to paths>
    <create tarball>

full-source-dist: light-source-dist.tmp1
    cp light-source-dist.tmp1 full-source-dist.tmp1
    <extra non-common steps for deps>
    <add prefix to paths>
    <create tarball>

[nalimilan]

Good idea. Here's the new version.

I've also added a commit for a change I needed to run make full-source-dist. But I find it weird that nobody would have noticed it, so maybe I'm missing something.

[tkelman]

Funny, github seems to have eaten my comments. Usually it keeps them around but collapses them (edit: can see them all linked from #9977). Anyway, the version as of 3b80506 looks good to me, assuming you've checked that the tarballs from it look right. @staticfloat want to give this a once-over?

[tkelman]

And I guess we should be able to backport some or all of this since this part doesn't change the meaning of any existing names yet.

[nalimilan]

The tarballs look correct, at least the build succeeds and the HTML docs are installed as expected.

[staticfloat]

Why the change from $(BUILDDIR) to _build? Just curious.

[nalimilan]

@staticfloat First I wanted to reuse $(BUILDDIR) in the top-level Makefile, but then I realized it would mean defining that variable in Make.inc, and its name sounded too general and possibly confusing. So I thought about renaming it to $(SPHINX_BUILDDIR), but eventually wondered about the use case for setting that variable. We don't support different build directories for anything else. But if you like I can change it.

[staticfloat]

I don't mind. Just curious. I have no further critique.

[tkelman]

I guess we need to update the readme now that python is a requirement for make install. I thought it would already be necessary for LLVM, but apparently not... #10268

[tkelman]

I backported just the first commit in 0d1e7bc, we can skip the others.