On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:21 AM Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:
> > > Again, the question is: what problem are we trying to solve? > > Org boasts itself as a format to write, among other things, > documentation. Do you think it is confidence-inspiring if we do not > write our own documentation in our format? See also > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food>. This problem > is now solved. > > Also, no matter how you look at it, doing any non-trivial edit in > "org.texi" is painful. I want to ease that pain for current contributors > (at least me), too. > +1 Editing Org is so much natural than .texi. And by this flow, we are not obsoleting .texi, just having it generate automatically instead of manually. It like writing a higher level language like C or Python instead of tinkering in Assembly. > Also, I'm not suggesting to get rid of "org.texi". I'm suggesting to > generate it from "manual.org" and to avoid as much as possible editing > it manually thereafter. In practice, this change is so small that I do > not understand what all this fuss is about. This should be simple: move > "manual.org" to doc/, overwrite "org.texi", and, when we feel confident > enough, if it ever happens, remove "org.texi" altogether from the > repository, generating it only before bundling a new Org release or > merging it with Emacs. > Exactly. Emacs will anyways ship with org.texi. So moving the manual source to Org in the Org repo shouldn't concern the Emacs repo. -- Kaushal Modi
