On Mon, Jun 21 2021, Taylor Blau wrote: > Even though the 'TECH_DOCS' variable was introduced all the way back in > 5e00439f0a (Documentation: build html for all files in technical and > howto, 2012-10-23), the 'bitmap-format' document was never added to that > list when it was created. > > Prepare for changes to this file by including it in the list of > technical documentation that 'make doc' will build by default. > > Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/Makefile | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/Makefile b/Documentation/Makefile > index f5605b7767..7d7b778b28 100644 > --- a/Documentation/Makefile > +++ b/Documentation/Makefile > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ SP_ARTICLES += $(API_DOCS) > TECH_DOCS += MyFirstContribution > TECH_DOCS += MyFirstObjectWalk > TECH_DOCS += SubmittingPatches > +TECH_DOCS += technical/bitmap-format > TECH_DOCS += technical/hash-function-transition > TECH_DOCS += technical/http-protocol > TECH_DOCS += technical/index-format As a mostly aside I've got a local series queued up to move all of these "format" docs to e.g. gitformat-bitmap(5), i.e. to make them first-class manpages, so other pages can link to them. Right now we mostly don't, but when our manpages do they link to the generated HTML, which e.g. I don't have installed by default. So since you're linking to it: Does anyone prefer this state of a affairs, and isn't it mainly useful for built docs such as https://git-scm.com/docs/git-multi-pack-index. But there's still (but maybe later in this series) a link to bitmap-format anywhere from another manual page (but there is for e.g. technical/pack-format.html).
