On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> GitHub supports adoc; it's why I used it. https://github.com/apache/
> logging-log4j2/blob/master/BUILDING.adoc
>
Nice, I learn new things everyday.
Gary
>
> On 5 January 2017 at 17:03, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> Hm, we will still have MD fi
GitHub supports adoc; it's why I used it.
https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/master/BUILDING.adoc
On 5 January 2017 at 17:03, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hm, we will still have MD files for GitHub unless we have some tooling to
> convert ADOC to MD. Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 201
Hm, we will still have MD files for GitHub unless we have some tooling to
convert ADOC to MD. Thoughts?
Gary
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> Where is .txt? I see .xml which is some sort of HTML extension format.
>
> I have more experience with markdown, but asciidoc seems t
Where is .txt? I see .xml which is some sort of HTML extension format.
I have more experience with markdown, but asciidoc seems to be more
commonly used for actual documentation due to its feature set. I was
thinking of suggesting that we convert our HTML manual into one of those
formats.
On 5 Ja
AsciiDoc? Really? We need to settle on AsciiDoc or MD. Pick one. MD seems
to be quite popular these days.
Gary
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Mikael Ståldal
wrote:
> Since Matt's recent committ, we now have three different documentation
> formats: .txt, .md and .adoc
>
> Should we try to be mo
