On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:32:58PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > This is a definite improvement. Two thoughts come to mind, though: > > > > 1. Do we need a separate script for this? Couldn't the existing linter > > script check this while it is reading all of the files (it knows > > which ones are supposed to be manpages because they are annotated > > with the --section option). > > It's not needed, but I think it's better, one is iterating a > line-at-time, one slurps all lines, they have different sorts of error > reporting (one quotes the whole line). > [...] OK. As the person who looked at all of it much more closely, I'll trust your judgement there. > > 2. Instead of linting, could we just be automatically sticking this > > boilerplate in as part of the build (either through some asciidoc > > magic, or even just a plain old "cat")? Even better than being > > reminded that you forgot something is making it impossible to > > forget it in the first place. > > Whenever I take an aborted effort at the docs I end up with some aborted > effort to migrte them to texinfo, so I'm sympathetic to the automatic > generation part of this. > > But for something trivial like this I think there's more value in having > a 1=1 match between WYS and WYG, not adding magic blurbs by the build > system for something so trivial. > > That being said I wouldn't mind it much, just seemed like an obvious > thing to add a lint for as it stands now... Yeah, I agree that complicating the build may create its own problems. If we were already munging the *.txt files it may not be a big deal to add further munging, but it would be a jump from the current state of "we feed it directly to asciidoc". I'm OK to forget about it for now and see if other useful applications of such munging come up. -Peff
