From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Allow building Git with Asciidoctor Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 05:51:19 -0400 Message-ID: <20141014095119.GC16686@peff.net> References: <1413070656-241955-1-git-send-email-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "brian m. carlson" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 14 15:51:30 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xe2Vb-0000uJ-GF for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:51:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932155AbaJNNvX (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:51:23 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:58321 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755244AbaJNNvX (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:51:23 -0400 Received: (qmail 12016 invoked by uid 102); 14 Oct 2014 13:51:22 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:51:22 -0500 Received: (qmail 10963 invoked by uid 107); 14 Oct 2014 09:51:21 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 05:51:21 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 14 Oct 2014 05:51:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1413070656-241955-1-git-send-email-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:37:32PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: > This series is designed to implement the changes necessary to build Git > using Asciidoctor instead of AsciiDoc. Thanks. I had always taken the attitude that we wrote for the original Python AsciiDoc, and that using AsciiDoctor was a choice that git-scm.com made, and something they would have to deal with as far as compatibility (AFAIK, AsciiDoctor grew out of git-scm.com's home-grown asciidoc parser). What's the status on AsciiDoc versus AsciiDoctor? The latter seems more actively developed these days, but perhaps that is just my perception. The incompatibilities seem fairly minimal (if those first two patches are the extent of it, I have no problem at all trying to remain compatible with both). Would it ever make sense to switch to AsciiDoctor as our official command-line build program? I know it is supposed to be much faster (though a lot of the slowness in our build chain is due to docbook, not asciidoc itself). Specifically I'm not excited about getting into a state where we have to maintain both an asciidoc.conf file _and_ ruby extensions for asciidoctor. I don't mind if somebody wants to step up and keep the asciidoctor bits in sync with the asciidoc.conf, but I feel like one of them needs to be considered the "master". -Peff