On 2020-08-06 08:48, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 05:12:30PM +0200, pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:49:50PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
FWIW, I *really* like how the extra markup renders in a browser, and I
don't think I'm the only one.
The thing
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 05:12:30PM +0200, pet...@infradead.org wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:49:50PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> > FWIW, I *really* like how the extra markup renders in a browser, and I
> > don't think I'm the only one.
>
> The thing is, I write code in a text editor, not
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:49:50PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> FWIW, I *really* like how the extra markup renders in a browser, and I
> don't think I'm the only one.
The thing is, I write code in a text editor, not a browser. When a
header file says: read Documentation/foo I do 'gf' and that
On 2020-07-29 14:44, pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 09:46:55AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
Constant names stand out least effectively by themselves. In
kernel-doc comments they are preceded by a '%'. Would that make the
text more readable for you? Does our doc
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 09:46:55AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> Constant names stand out least effectively by themselves. In
> kernel-doc comments they are preceded by a '%'. Would that make the
> text more readable for you? Does our doc infrastructure honour that in
> .rst documents?
It
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 11:28:28AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Sometimes I do look at the html output on kernel.org, and it is nicely
> organized. The future of developers will probably prefer that format
> over plain text whether we like it or not, so I encourage that we
The future is doomed.
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:52:52 +0200
pet...@infradead.org wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:33:25AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what to do other than to continue to push for minimal use of
> > intrusive markup.
>
> Perhaps make it clearer in:
>
>
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:33:25AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> I'm not sure what to do other than to continue to push for minimal use of
> intrusive markup.
Perhaps make it clearer in:
Documentation/doc-guide/
because people claim they follow that, but the result is that I get
completely
On Fri, Jul 24 2020, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:41:30 +0100
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
>> Great example. Some people definitely go too far with rst markup, and
>> we generally try to discourage it. And I'm pretty sure we take patches
>
> I'd send patches but I suck at markup
On Fri, Jul 24 2020, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:33:25 -0600
> Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
>> Give people a tool, some of them will make more use of it than you might
>> like. I do my best to push back against excessive markup (which all of the
>> above qualifies as, as far as
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:41:30 +0100
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Great example. Some people definitely go too far with rst markup, and
> we generally try to discourage it. And I'm pretty sure we take patches
I'd send patches but I suck at markup ;-) [1]
> to remove excessive markup where it's gone
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:33:25 -0600
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Give people a tool, some of them will make more use of it than you might
> like. I do my best to push back against excessive markup (which all of the
> above qualifies as, as far as I'm concerned), but I can't really even do
> that will
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 06:41:30PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> I think we're all pretty comfortable seeing function names adorned with
> a closing pair of parens. The ``...`` to adorn constants feels OK to me,
> but maybe not to you? If that feels excessive, can you suggest something
> that
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:22:00PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I like how RST can help make for a better grouping of our documents
> and put it into other formats. But I have to rant a little because I'm
> currently experiencing some of the frustration that Peter commonly
> complains about.
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:22:00 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > It is tempting to describe the second kind as starting with a
> > component, but that isn't always accurate: a pathname can lack both
> > slashes and components, it can be empty, in other words. This is
> > generally forbidden in
Hi Jon,
I like how RST can help make for a better grouping of our documents
and put it into other formats. But I have to rant a little because I'm
currently experiencing some of the frustration that Peter commonly
complains about.
I'm looking into how to make the event directory tree be created
16 matches
Mail list logo
