On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 05:26, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 08:51:19PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote: > > > When I posted v1, it turned into quite a thread [1] on AsciiDoc vs > > Asciidoctor vs Asciidoctor 2.0 and differences in rendering. (I am on > > Asciidoctor 1.5.5.) > > Yes, sadly I still can't format the docs at all with 2.0.10 (which is > what ships in Debian unstable). > > > do also think it makes sense to first make the "softer" switch to > > Asciidoctor-by-default and get that particular hurdle behind us. Then, > > once we're ok with dropping AsciiDoc entirely, we can do the switch to > > an Asciidoctor-only toolchain. > > Yeah, I do still like that as an endgame, but I like what you have here > as an intermediate step in the right direction.
Hmm, so this sounds like once I am happy with replacing AsciiDoc with Asciidoctor 1(.5.5), I should rather not propose a series "let's default to Asciidoctor!!!" but instead a slightly more careful "go with Asciidoctor, but document that we work badly with v2 and that the 2nd choice after Asciidoctor 1 should be AsciiDoc". Or do you see it differently? (I wonder which Asciidoctor-version Junio would be on..) Martin
