linux-kernel - Re: Kernel docs: muddying the waters a bit

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:25:49 +0200
From:	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: Kernel docs: muddying the waters a bit

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> So can we discuss?  I'm not saying we have to use Sphinx, but, should we
> choose not to, we should do so with open eyes and good reasons for the
> course we do take.  What do you all think?

FWIW I was in favor of reStructuredText to begin with, but decided I'd
rather have any lightweight markup than a bikeshed fest over which
one. Switching is a non-issue to me.

It does seem like the tools available for each markup carry more weight
than the markup itself, as long as there aren't any huge gaps. Sphinx
seems like a reasonable, actively developed choice.

However I didn't think Sphinx could produce docbook, and a quick search
doesn't convince me otherwise. Do you have some links to back this up?
Would the lack of docbook be a showstopper? (Of course, the pandoc
swiss-army knife can handle rst->docbook if needed.)

Sphinx might offer a way to drop docproc through the extension
mechanism, without resorting to the "separate-file approach". It might
be a more sensible approach as a whole.

I'll have a more in-depth look into this.

BR,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center