linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 08/29] docs: filesystems: convert configfs.txt to ReST

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]

Message-ID: <20200427125310.GC31904@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 14:53:10 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/29] docs: filesystems: convert configfs.txt to
 ReST

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 04:53:17PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > It wasn't entirely uncommon, but that's not really the point.  The
> > Problem is all the weird ".." or "::" annotations that really kill
> > the flow, or things like "|copy|" that have no reason to exist.
> 
> This sounds sort of like "my markup is good, yours is bad", honestly.  If
> somebody were trying to add bracketed headings to a new document, I
> suspect we'd get similar complaints.

Not really.  It is a "less markup is better". 

> The markup can certainly be toned down.  If you don't like |copy|, it can
> just as easily remain "(c)" or become ©, or just go away entirely.  That
> would get rid of the ".. include:: <isonum.txt>" line too.  I would
> happily make a rule that we don't bother with markup like |copy|
> anywhere in the kernel docs.

That is a good start.

> The SPDX line is supposed to exist in all files, of course.

No problem with that.  I'll happily take a SPDX patch any time.

> If Mauro does that, can you live with "::" to mark a literal block?  It
> doesn't seem like a whole lot of noise...?

That is in fact one of my favourite pet pevees with the whole RST
thing.