brian m. carlson wrote: > On 2021-05-12 at 02:48:59, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > Maybe when distros upgraded shipped Asciidoctor version to 2.0, we can > > bump the version requirement. > > My general policy, which need not be Git's policy (but I think is > reasonable), is that I will support the previous version of Debian and > Ubuntu LTS for a year after the new one comes out. Under that policy, > we'd wait until a year after Debian 11 (bullseye) is released. Under that policy the supported version would be Debian 10 (buster), which ships with Ruby 2.5. It's more than capable of running asciidoctor. The CI of asciidoctor tests versionof Ruby as old as 2.3, so Debian 10 is safe. In fact, I would bet you that asciidoctor works fine in Ruby 2.1 shipped with Debian 8 (jessie) released in 2015. Maybe users of Debian 7 would have trouble... *maybe*... It's hard to tell because Debian doesn't even provide package information about that release. > > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > > > index 93664d6714..cb75dec314 100644 > > > --- a/Makefile > > > +++ b/Makefile > > > @@ -285,6 +285,9 @@ all:: > > > # Define USE_ASCIIDOCTOR to use Asciidoctor instead of AsciiDoc to build the > > > # documentation. > > > # > > > +# Define USE_ASCIIDOCTOR_MANPAGE to use Asciidoctor's manual page backend > > > +# instead of building manual pages from DocBook. > > > +# > > The wording should be "...instead of building manual pages from DocBook with > > xmlto". > > I can make that change. We're not using DocBook either way, with xmlto > or other tooling (e.g., a plain xsltproc), so what we have here is > accurate. Hmm... cat Documentation/manpage.xsl <xsl:import href="http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl-ns/current/manpages/docbook.xsl"; /> That's a deliverable of the DocBook project, is it not? -- Felipe Contreras
