Am 11.10.2016 um 18:45 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > If we allow such scripts (and we do since day zero, due to > kernel-doc), then there are 3 options: > > 1) use a single python script to run the scripts needed in the > build process (e. g. merging kernel-cmd extension upstream); > > 2) use a dedicated python script for every non-phyton script; > > 3) use only python scripts to extend Sphinx functionality. > > The (2) scenario seems to be the worse case, as it will end by > having a perl(/shell?) script/python script pair for every > non-python script we need to run, we're actually making it twice > worse. > > For (3) to happen, we'll need to convert both kernel-doc and > parse-headers.pl to Python. This could be a long term goal, > but I prefer to not rewrite those scripts for a while, as > it is a lot easier to maintain them in perl, at least to me, and it > is less disruptive, as rewriting kernel-doc to Python can introduce > regressions. > Hi Mauro, its a bit OT in this thread, but in the linuxdoc project, the kernel-doc is already converted to python. https://return42.github.io/linuxdoc/cmd-line.html#kernel-doc and you have used it already, when you lint with kernel-lint. Hence I see more progressions than regression ;-) > So, the way I see, (1) is the best approach. agree --Markus-- > >> Anyway, these are only my 2cent. I'am interested in what Jon says >> in general about using (Perl) scripts to generate reST content. >> >> --Markus-- >> > > Regards, > Mauro -- 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
