Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] docs: submit-checklist: change to autonumbered lists

Randy Dunlap
2024-03-03T18:19:55Z

On 3/3/24 07:55, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> -1) If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
>>> +#. If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
>>> that facility. Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
>>> that you use.
>>
>> Wait. This will render the list starting from:
>>
>> 1. If you use ...
>>

I have already said that Stephen Rothwell wanted this #1 item to be at the
top of the checklist. That makes it easy to tell people to "see submit-checklist
item #1".

>> In patch 1/1, you didn't change the ")".
>>
>> It was Jani who suggested "#.", but "#)" would work just fine.
>
> So I'm a little confused. Is the objection that it renders the number
> as "1." rather than "1)"? That doesn't seem like the biggest of deals,
> somehow, but am I missing something?
>
> A bigger complaint I might raise is that auto-numbering restarts the
> enumeration in each subsection, so we have a lot of steps #1, which is a
> definite change from before.

ack

> That, of course, can be fixed by giving an explicit starting number in
> each subsection, partially defeating the point of the change in the
> first place.

ack

> I honestly have to wonder: does this document need the enumerated list
> at all? We don't refer to the numbers anywhere, so I don't think there
> is much useful information there. How about just using regular bulleted
> lists instead?

That also works.

> That said, I don't have strong feelings one way or the other, and can
> certainly apply it as-is if that's the consensus on what we should do.

My preference is to leave the submit-checklist numbered from 1 to N,
without a repeated #1 in each section. But I'm not hung up on it.

thanks.
--
#Randy