From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
To: Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org>, Pavel Roskin <plroskin@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux-Sparse <linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sparse documentation format, rST vs MD
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:11:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3dc934f9-d50c-fc96-7d0d-6a063cc2ad22@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANeU7Qk-BVrqh_S50=oC7MhaNPsDgYa8AZr9v1VXoSmeVsNUMQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/07/2017 04:29 AM, Christopher Li wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Pavel Roskin <plroskin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>>
>>> MarkDown Pros:
>>> - More friendly to web.
>
> So far we have 2 on MD (Josh strongly).
> You are on reStructuredText.
I prefer MD (or asciidoc :) FWIW.
> I just did a google trends comparing keyword "Markdown" and "reStructuredText"
> It seems "Markdown" is overwhelming more popular then "reStructuredText".
>
> If I try "RST" then "RST" is slightly ahead of "Markdown", but mostly
> due to false positives. Google "RST" most result are not "reStructuredText"
> related.
>
> I think I will go with MarkDown for now. You are right the content is the
> most important, not the format.
--
~Randy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-07 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-07 1:28 Sparse documentation format, rST vs MD Christopher Li
2017-08-07 1:44 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-08-07 1:58 ` Christopher Li
2017-08-07 4:56 ` Josh Triplett
2017-08-07 11:46 ` Christopher Li
2017-08-07 11:57 ` Josh Triplett
2017-08-07 16:25 ` Jonathan Corbet
2017-08-07 23:45 ` Christopher Li
2017-08-07 6:03 ` Pavel Roskin
2017-08-07 8:15 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-08-07 11:29 ` Christopher Li
2017-08-07 16:11 ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3dc934f9-d50c-fc96-7d0d-6a063cc2ad22@infradead.org \
--to=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
--cc=plroskin@gmail.com \
--cc=sparse@chrisli.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).