Re: [PATCH v3 05/21] Documentation/applying-patches.txt: convert it to ReST markup
Em Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:20:37 -0700 Joe Perches escreveu: > On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 11:10 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:06:34 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > wrote: > > - use the correct markup to identify each section; > > - Add some blank lines for Sphinx to properly interpret > > the markups; > > - Remove a blank space on some paragraphs; > > - Fix the verbatim and bold markups; > > - Cleanup the remaining errors to make Sphinx happy. > > > So I certainly don't have a problem with the changes made to this file, but > > there is some discomfort at a higher level: > > +Last update: > > + 2006-01-05 > > I have to wonder what the value of a document saying how to FTP the patch > > and move up to 2.6.13 is in 2016. > > > Who knows, there might still be value in a discussion of using the patch > > tool. But I think we should seriously consider making a "historical" > > section for documents that are nearing or past their expiration dates. > > Or just entirely delete historical document sections. IMHO, it is best to just delete, or otherwise someone would be tempted to convert to ReST. In the specific case of this one, I still think it is has valuable information. That's why I updated it on patch 17/17 of the second patch series. > All the older kernel sources would still have them so > I don't see much of a need to keep the archival valued > documentation bits in the current kernel source tree. > > Suggesting using tools other than git seems wrong today. Well, while we still generate weekly and per-release patches at ftp.kernel.org, the information there is still valid. I have one doubt, however: on this document (and on another converted one), it mentions about: ftp.cc.kernel.org, where "cc" is a Country code. I kept it there (and on another document at the development-process/ dir). Is it still valid? I did some tests from here, and it didn't seem work. > And thank you Mauro for the relatively thankless effort > to cleanse and modernize the process documentation. Anytime! Thanks, Mauro -- 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: [PATCH v3 05/21] Documentation/applying-patches.txt: convert it to ReST markup
Em Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:10:26 -0600 Jonathan Corbet escreveu: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:06:34 -0300 > Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > - use the correct markup to identify each section; > > > > - Add some blank lines for Sphinx to properly interpret > > the markups; > > > > - Remove a blank space on some paragraphs; > > > > - Fix the verbatim and bold markups; > > > > - Cleanup the remaining errors to make Sphinx happy. > > So I certainly don't have a problem with the changes made to this file, but > there is some discomfort at a higher level: > > > +Last update: > > + 2006-01-05 > > I have to wonder what the value of a document saying how to FTP the patch > and move up to 2.6.13 is in 2016. As you're commenting my first patch series, I suspect you didn't see the second one yet ;) Its subject is: [PATCH 00/17] Improve documentation for the development-process There, I read all files that were moved to the development-process dir, and updated some things. I didn't read yet the files that were already there, but, as they're newer, I suspect they should be more synchronized with the status quo. In the case of this file, I updated it to point to 4.x, removed some legacy stuff, like the -git tarballs and updated the parts that mention the -mm kernels, adding a notice about linux-next. The patch is at: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9332673/ > > Who knows, there might still be value in a discussion of using the patch > tool. Well, it teaches how to use the "patch" tool, with can be useful for newbies. It also explains how the incremental and non-incremental Kernel patches work. So, I guess it is still useful. > But I think we should seriously consider making a "historical" > section for documents that are nearing or past their expiration dates. > > jon Thanks, Mauro -- 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: [PATCH v3 05/21] Documentation/applying-patches.txt: convert it to ReST markup
On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 11:10 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:06:34 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab > wrote: > - use the correct markup to identify each section; > - Add some blank lines for Sphinx to properly interpret > the markups; > - Remove a blank space on some paragraphs; > - Fix the verbatim and bold markups; > - Cleanup the remaining errors to make Sphinx happy. > So I certainly don't have a problem with the changes made to this file, but > there is some discomfort at a higher level: > +Last update: > + 2006-01-05 > I have to wonder what the value of a document saying how to FTP the patch > and move up to 2.6.13 is in 2016. > Who knows, there might still be value in a discussion of using the patch > tool. But I think we should seriously consider making a "historical" > section for documents that are nearing or past their expiration dates. Or just entirely delete historical document sections. All the older kernel sources would still have them so I don't see much of a need to keep the archival valued documentation bits in the current kernel source tree. Suggesting using tools other than git seems wrong today. And thank you Mauro for the relatively thankless effort to cleanse and modernize the process documentation. -- 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: [PATCH v3 05/21] Documentation/applying-patches.txt: convert it to ReST markup
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:06:34 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > - use the correct markup to identify each section; > > - Add some blank lines for Sphinx to properly interpret > the markups; > > - Remove a blank space on some paragraphs; > > - Fix the verbatim and bold markups; > > - Cleanup the remaining errors to make Sphinx happy. So I certainly don't have a problem with the changes made to this file, but there is some discomfort at a higher level: > +Last update: > + 2006-01-05 I have to wonder what the value of a document saying how to FTP the patch and move up to 2.6.13 is in 2016. Who knows, there might still be value in a discussion of using the patch tool. But I think we should seriously consider making a "historical" section for documents that are nearing or past their expiration dates. jon -- 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
