Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

2017-10-16 Thread Jani Nikula 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, "gre...@linuxfoundation.org"  
wrote:
> And really, all news one should be in correct markdown format, as it is
> almost identical to a "normal" text file.  Heck, it really is just a
> "plain" textfile, you can read it as-such, right?

*cough* reStructuredText *cough*

BR,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

2017-10-14 Thread Wolfram Sang 

> Not that sphinx doesn't have it's own issues, but you have to admit it
> is much better now than it used to be, right?

That goes without saying, but we still added plain textfiles to
Documentation/ since 2008, so I was wondering...



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

2017-10-14 Thread gre...@linuxfoundation.org 
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 06:14:13PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:10:38AM +0200, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system,
> > so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the
> > kernel tree wasn't even imagined.  But now that has changed, so add the
> > old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly
> > reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things
> > around.)
> 
> Cool, I like it much to see it added to the kernel tree.
> 
> But could you explain what "robust" means in this context?

We did not have a way to easily turn the files in Documentation/ into
html and pdf docs like we now do.  The documentation is now
auto-generated and placed up on kernel.org here:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/

> And what has changed which makes it "robust"? Sphinx?

Yes, remember the mess we had before?

Not that sphinx doesn't have it's own issues, but you have to admit it
is much better now than it used to be, right?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

2017-10-14 Thread Wolfram Sang 
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:10:38AM +0200, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system,
> so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the
> kernel tree wasn't even imagined.  But now that has changed, so add the
> old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly
> reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things
> around.)

Cool, I like it much to see it added to the kernel tree.

But could you explain what "robust" means in this context? And what
has changed which makes it "robust"? Sphinx?

I am interested in how such documents are handled best.



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature