Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I think it's too soon to break the stock toolchain on systems as > recent as RHEL 5.5 in the name of slightly nicer asciidoc syntax. It is debatable if any version of distribution can be called "recent" if they ship 5 year old version of software that is updated fairly often, though. > We could also keep the nice syntax and have some simple sed-based > pre-processor that converts the syntax to the older and more widely > supported version. No, let's not go there. I do not see any reason to believe that such a sed script would do an equally good or better job as native AsciiDoc implementation to deal with inline-literals. That means we would end up writing our documentation with a subset of newer AsciiDoc that the custom sed script can grok---which defeats the purpose of the whole exercise. > Or we could just decide to break RHEL 5 and systems released at a > similar time, but that isn't what the patch suggested it was doing, so > we should probably step back and ponder whether that's something we > want to do. Very true. Jeff, how do we want to proceed? For the upcoming release, I am inclined to say that we would revert 6cf378f (docs: stop using asciidoc no-inline-literal, 2012-04-26). We would still need to double check the result, though. Documentation updates that came after it are written assuming "inline-literal" behaviour, and parts we may have "fixed" with the commit will format to their old rendition. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html