[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 14:34:25 +0000
From: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
Graham Whaley <graham.whaley@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel docs: muddying the waters a bit
> DocBook is a means to an end; nobody really wants DocBook itself as far
> as I can tell.
We only have docbook because it was the tool of choice rather a lot of
years ago to then get useful output formats. It was just inherited when
borrowed the original scripts from Gnome/Gtk. It's still the most
effective way IMHO of building big structured documents out of the kernel.
The Gtk people long ago rewrote the original document script into a real
tool so they have some different and maintained tools that are close to
equivalent and already have some markdown support. Before we go off and
re-invent the wheel it might be worth just borrowing their wheel and
tweaking it as needed ? In particular they can generate help indexes so
that the entire output becomes nicely browsable with an HTML based help
browser.
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists