From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
To: Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: Explain light-handed markup preference a bit better
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 09:54:00 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161129095400.0e698ff6@vento.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8EA6D751-36E7-4CEB-8817-1B186A685B96@darmarit.de>
Em Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:28:12 +0100
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de> escreveu:
> Am 29.11.2016 um 10:23 schrieb Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>:
>
> > We already had a super-short blurb, but worth extending it I think:
> > We're still pretty far away from anything like a consensus, but
> > there's clearly a lot of people who prefer an as-light as possible
> > approach to converting existing .txt files to .rst. Make sure this is
> > properly taken into account and clear.
> >
> > Motivated by discussions with Peter and Christoph and others.
> >
> > v2:
> > - Mention that existing headings should be kept when converting
> > existing .txt files (Mauro).
> > - Explain that we prefer :: for quoting code, it's easier on the
> > eyes (Mauro).
> > - Explain that blindly converting outdated docs is harmful. Motived
> > by comments Peter did in our discussion.
> >
> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
> > Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> > ---
> > Documentation/kernel-documentation.rst | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Sorry for my dump remarks ...
>
> * shouldn't it on top of Jon's docs-next?
> * should we lose a few words about tabs/indentation?
>
> IMO indentation for reST markup should be 2 spaces, not
> tabs (8 spaces). I know about CodeStyling but I think this doc
> (markup) and not source-code. Code-examples should be indent
> by tabs as usual. BTW here is what CodingStyle says:
>
> Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig,
> spaces are never used for indentation, and the above example
> is deliberately broken.
> Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of
> lines.
>
> ... encourages me to prefer spaces.
I agree that we should define the preferred spaces style.
Yet, I very much prefer that patches converting existing documents
to not touch whitespaces/tabs except when really needed.
>From my side, the editors I use to write documents are set to automatically
convert 8 column alignments to tabs. I also have a script that I run when
needed, when I receive a patch with whitespaces at the end of lines.
It also converts spaces to tabs where needed.
So, whatever definition we use, IMO we should define that a tab has
8 spaces, and that tabs should be used if the alignment requires
more than 8 columns.
With regards of using indentation with 2 spaces, I don't have any
strong opinion.
>From what I remember, the scripts you used to convert the media
documents made a 4 spaces alignment for the media documentation
on several places, but I may be wrong.
Thanks,
Mauro
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-29 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-29 9:23 [PATCH] doc: Explain light-handed markup preference a bit better Daniel Vetter
2016-11-29 10:28 ` Markus Heiser
2016-11-29 11:54 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab [this message]
2016-11-29 10:38 ` Jani Nikula
2016-11-29 11:43 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-11-29 15:08 ` Jani Nikula
2016-12-07 15:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-11-29 13:17 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-12-06 7:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-07 15:45 ` Daniel Vetter
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-12-14 13:46 Daniel Vetter
2016-12-07 15:42 Daniel Vetter
2016-12-07 19:39 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-12-08 9:10 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-12-08 22:06 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-12-12 17:47 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2016-12-12 17:54 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-11-28 16:16 Daniel Vetter
2016-11-28 17:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
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=20161129095400.0e698ff6@vento.lan \
--to=mchehab@s-opensource.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markus.heiser@darmarit.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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