[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160916183631.78ab4758@vento.lan>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:36:31 -0300
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: 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 <joe@...ches.com> 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 <mchehab@...pensource.com> 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 Or just entirely delete historical document sections.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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists