I don't have strong views on which format we use for docs. Html has the
nice feature that most people are happy writing it and making doc
writing simple seems a good idea.
One negative for the pod2texi approach is that debian stable does not
have texinfo 5; to test this series I had to build the
Hi David, notmuch developers,
* David Bremner [17. Jan. 2014]:
> A more radical proposal would be to skip generating info and assuming
> everybody can browse html in emacs. That assumption is supposed to
> become less ludicrous in emacs24.4 with the inclusion of "eww".
While html-rendering is
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, David Bremner wrote:
> From: David Bremner
>
> This allows generation of man page and info document from the same source.
> It is also a bit more friendly to edit for most people.
Before plunging into reviewing this, I'd like to have some more views on
the choice of the
Jani Nikula writes:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, David Bremner wrote:
>> From: David Bremner
> In short, I'm really tempted by using markdown as the format, not least
> because it's what we use for the web pages. The big (also literally)
> downside is pandoc (http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/), the
Jani Nikula j...@nikula.org writes:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
From: David Bremner brem...@debian.org
In short, I'm really tempted by using markdown as the format, not least
because it's what we use for the web pages. The big (also literally)
downside is
Hi David, notmuch developers,
* David Bremner da...@tethera.net [17. Jan. 2014]:
A more radical proposal would be to skip generating info and assuming
everybody can browse html in emacs. That assumption is supposed to
become less ludicrous in emacs24.4 with the inclusion of eww.
While
From: David Bremner
This allows generation of man page and info document from the same source.
It is also a bit more friendly to edit for most people.
The conversion was done with the following perl script (some small
hand-editing of the .pod may be needed afterwards).