On Sat, 13 Feb 2016, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote: > So can we discuss? I'm not saying we have to use Sphinx, but, should we > choose not to, we should do so with open eyes and good reasons for the > course we do take. What do you all think? FWIW I was in favor of reStructuredText to begin with, but decided I'd rather have any lightweight markup than a bikeshed fest over which one. Switching is a non-issue to me. It does seem like the tools available for each markup carry more weight than the markup itself, as long as there aren't any huge gaps. Sphinx seems like a reasonable, actively developed choice. However I didn't think Sphinx could produce docbook, and a quick search doesn't convince me otherwise. Do you have some links to back this up? Would the lack of docbook be a showstopper? (Of course, the pandoc swiss-army knife can handle rst->docbook if needed.) Sphinx might offer a way to drop docproc through the extension mechanism, without resorting to the "separate-file approach". It might be a more sensible approach as a whole. I'll have a more in-depth look into this. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
