linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/32] docs/vm: convert to ReST format

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:   Fri, 13 Apr 2018 13:55:51 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/32] docs/vm: convert to ReST format

Sorry for the silence, I'm pedaling as fast as I can, honest...

On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 09:38:58 +0300
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> My thinking was to start with mechanical RST conversion and then to start
> working on the contents and ordering of the documentation. Some of the
> existing files, e.g. ksm.txt, can be moved as is into the appropriate
> places, others, like transhuge.txt should be at least split into admin/user
> and developer guides.
> 
> Another problem with many of the existing mm docs is that they are rather
> developer notes and it wouldn't be really straight forward to assign them
> to a particular topic.

All this sounds good.

> I believe that keeping the mm docs together will give better visibility of
> what (little) mm documentation we have and will make the updates easier.
> The documents that fit well into a certain topic could be linked there. For
> instance:

...but this sounds like just the opposite...?  

I've had this conversation with folks in a number of subsystems.
Everybody wants to keep their documentation together in one place - it's
easier for the developers after all.  But for the readers I think it's
objectively worse.  It perpetuates the mess that Documentation/ is, and
forces readers to go digging through all kinds of inappropriate material
in the hope of finding something that tells them what they need to know.

So I would *really* like to split the documentation by audience, as has
been done for a number of other kernel subsystems (and eventually all, I
hope).

I can go ahead and apply the RST conversion, that seems like a step in
the right direction regardless.  But I sure hope we don't really have to
keep it as an unorganized jumble of stuff...

Thanks,

jon