Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, doc: use internal linking for link to netdev FAQ

Jonathan Corbet
2023-03-13T13:37:37Z

David Vernet <void@manifault.com> writes:

> Sure, but there are practicalities to consider here. It takes O(minutes)
> to do a full docs build, as opposed to O(seconds). I've done reviews of
> docs patches where the engineer tried to build the docs tree, but
> thought it was hung and ended up cancelling it. Full docs builds also
> unfortunately spew quite a few warnings in other subtrees. You have to
> carefully wade through the warnings in those other subtrees to ensure
> you haven't added any new ones.
>
> It's hard enough to get people to write documentation. It's also hard
> enough to get them to test building their documentation before
> submitting it. I think there is a lot of value in being able to build
> the documentation for the subtree you're contributing to, and be able to
> have some expectation that it builds cleanly. Let's not make it more
> difficult for the people who are actually adding substantive
> documentation.

I get your point, but that is essentially saying that there should be no
linkages between our documentation subtrees, which defeats much of the
purpose of using a system like Sphinx.

In this specific case, though, there is a better solution. Text like:

see the netdev FAQ (Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst)

will add links in the built docs, and also tells readers of the
plain-text files where they should be looking. Without adding warnings.

For the bigger problem, the right answer is to start using intersphinx.
I guess I need to get serious about playing with that.

Thanks,

jon