Em Tue, 28 Nov 2023 07:42:12 -0700 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu: > Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Em Mon, 27 Nov 2023 16:31:39 -0700 > > Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu: > > >> diff --git a/scripts/sphinx-pre-install b/scripts/sphinx-pre-install > >> index 1fb88fdceec3..db75b1b86086 100755 > >> --- a/scripts/sphinx-pre-install > >> +++ b/scripts/sphinx-pre-install > >> @@ -32,8 +32,7 @@ my $python_cmd = ""; > >> my $activate_cmd; > >> my $min_version; > >> my $cur_version; > >> -my $rec_version = "1.7.9"; # PDF won't build here > >> -my $min_pdf_version = "2.4.4"; # Min version where pdf builds > >> +my $rec_version = "3.0"; > > > > Please don't. 3.0 version has a broken C domain, not properly supported. > > The fixes arrived only starting at 3.1 (I guess some went to 3.2, but > > 3.1 is usable, as far as I remember). > > So you're asking for 3.1 or 3.2 instead of 3.0? Yes. > > Honestly, I just picked 3.0 out of the air in the hopes of eventually > deprecating 2.x. Not lots of thought has gone into that > number...perhaps we should recommend higher yet? Well, we could recommend a higher version, but I can't see much differences between 3.2 and the latest version: for what we use, both will work on a similar way. Ok, layout may be different, there were some improvements on PDF output, etc. but they will all produce a decent documentation. Yet, while most C domain bugs introduced on 3.0 were solved in 3.1 and 3.2, there's one still pending issue[1]. Once C domain finally gets rid from this long term bug that having: .. c:struct:: foo .. c:function:: void foo(void) Produce warnings that "foo" id duplicated, then we'll have, IMO, our next recommended version :-) While Sphinx developers don't fix such bug, it doesn't really matter what version user will pick, so I would just pick the fastest one as a recommendation, starting from 3.1 or 3.2 as our currently recommended version. [1] https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/pull/8313 While I didn't make any benchmarks, I remember people reported poor performance with newer versions, so, without thinking to much, 3.1 or 3.2 seems a good candidate for the recommended version. Regards, Mauro
