From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D936D1E9B2A; Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:52:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755179546; cv=none; b=r3efDmE0v17EopTdTurHbzw5ZIJO8t1EutntT6A1UPr2jAPrN57osBByPptvJ2N9+91NI7CFgPnn0E0v61iDNJxSI6ufjg72tik39JrvB3pE28lL0qVDxom4SpbrLETetmRLmZfZEaw7n05jgktJGcUu19inFSmVtdLBFZKeE3E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755179546; c=relaxed/simple; bh=H/ucUNltvWA/WNQ7vYUrWuJ/a+PdsIb2eVUVXAtMNqA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=OH2RJJMB8JUvSZlEMxPTASVGNrO01FEpJTznUTAyrhHvwjhNtBTqu71HEZbJBvsLFXJ6sHSWbEFrw4EUy+2hxOYeLGq8VlZpqJQOHaSPhLK95YBUckG96MDLW2E0LicR5ZlsadFpDkvBwpkkCroHnYnDmbLw0Ptbo7Was/wo7Rk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=kLEZfiw6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="kLEZfiw6" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net D0D3B40AB4 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1755179544; bh=dIIZeueswEIgOf/YgafKN0m66ZuMdvcw1i04wbyCAgk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=kLEZfiw668KanKXhgcHU9d/ETqcWCk9mKykyonNdemzyj7m+SPrCSFtIPyPun96Ok ybRWmBWFyJdcTUsRMXFGM2taALmdaJRoqf9MyXcMCGoK4epK4uRkG6bEKXZcxzVAWK G4Z5NgV8nJg+Qdep+qeqv8Ql81J75BN1JfesCo7tAEVJUizmoG5I5Md7xXEoLmx34w QUo6Uy4dibhp+Ai5pW48Cvtyhnox3kteAfSKCfpqYVTsVNEtT5hHHShjEf/8HgmfvR p+WAKcO2YKbgpUbmdvxRff7Y/9t4wXnB3OdJacXBLxRN+y/EtbHt99L33sjQdVKK1+ 44dHNXfenty8g== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0D3B40AB4; Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:52:23 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] docs: move sphinx-pre-install to tools/doc In-Reply-To: <20250814080539.2218eb4e@foz.lan> References: <20250813213218.198582-1-corbet@lwn.net> <20250813213218.198582-8-corbet@lwn.net> <20250814013600.5aec0521@foz.lan> <871ppehcod.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <20250814080539.2218eb4e@foz.lan> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 07:52:22 -0600 Message-ID: <87wm76f1t5.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mauro Carvalho Chehab writes: > This series is big (51 patches) because it needs to fix thousands of > broken cross references on media. I may end splitting it on two series > to make easier for review, one for the script and another for media doc > fixes. That might help, yes. > Such series affect this RFC as it is creating a tools/docs and placing > there the parse-headers.py code as: > > tools/docs/lib/parse_data_structs.py | 230 +++++++++++++++-------------------- > tools/docs/parse-headers.py | 5 > > Now, if you prefer tools/doc instead and/or place the libs elsewhere, > we have a couple of options: > > 1. rebase my series to do the changes. I suspect that there won't > be much conflicts, but this may delay a little bit sending you > what I have; > > 2. add a patch at the end moving stuff elsewhere; > > 3. on your series, move them elsewhere. > > What do you prefer? Between "tools/doc" and "tools/docs" I don't really have overly strong feelings; if you work has the latter we can just stick with that. If you propose "tools/Documentation", though, expect resistance :) As I said, my series was an RFC to see what it would look like; it did't take all that long the first time around, and will be even quicker to redo on top of a new base, whatever that turns out to be. Thanks, jon