On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Tim Bird <tbird20d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 9/1/2015 10:14 AM, Tim Bird wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Matt Porter <mporter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> < snip > >> >>>> >>>> But to answer your question, if we get a format I'll do >>>> conversions and hope I'm not alone. >>> >>> I'm sure others will help out. I will, and I'm pretty sure we can get >>> some conversion sprints set up at conferences (I know I can set aside >>> some time or resources at ELC in the spring - it might be too late for >>> ELCE in October to set up a scheduled block of time, but we can start >>> getting the word out.) As I said in my other e-mail, one doesn't have >>> to be a kernel coder to do this, and the conversions should be pretty >>> straight-forward. >>> -- Tim >>> >> >> A conversion sprint at ELCE sounds like a good idea if we can find a >> good time to schedule it. I can help, so there will be at least two >> of us who can help people as they encounter issues. > > Even if we don't find a block of time, we can do something like > announce a "contest", ask people to do something in their spare time, > and find some way to get them a raffle ticket if they submit a patch > with a conversion. Then hold an extra prize drawing during the > closing session, with just those raffle tickets, and give someone a > nice award for contributing. Of course, there's always the adage that > you should be careful what you measure and reward... We don't want a > flood of crappy conversions, with a time constraint on the review. > I'll think some more about this. An alternative would be to have a > contest announced ahead of the event, with enough time for people to > submit and get reviewed. Sounds like a review nightmare. That's another reason why as much automated conversion we can do, the better. > By the way - I presume the new docs will replace the existing ones, > but I could imagine wanting to have them live side-by-side > temporarily. Any thoughts on this? Will file name or location > changes be allowed during the conversion? I proposed some ideas earlier in the thread. Either we can have both side by side or do a mass conversion to YAML making the existing doc a comment (add # prefix). Any renames/moving should be separate (there's some clean-up I'd like to there as well). Exact rules depend on the approach, but we need to be able to tell which bindings conversions are not started, in progress, or complete. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
