On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 12:45:45PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 12:55:42 +0200 > Henrik Austad <henrik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 09:20:30AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Wed, 2018-08-29 at 14:28 +0200, Henrik Austad wrote: > > > > The 00-INDEX files are supposed to give a summary of all files present > > > > in a directory, but these files are horribly out of date and their > > > > usefulness is brought into question. > > > > > > > > A few years back it was mentioned that these files were no longer > > > > needed, and they have since then grown further out of date, so perhaps > > > > it is time to just throw them out. > > > > > > Good idea. > > > > > > .rst is becoming more common and these 00-INDEX files > > > are unnecessary and occasionally misleading. > > > > Ok, should I respin and clean up all the other files referencing 00-INDEX > > and send to a wider audience? > > Wider audience might be good. I've not yet decided whether I think this > is a good idea or not. We certainly don't need those files for stuff > that's in the RST doctree, that's what the index.rst files are for. But I > suspect some people might complain about losing them for the rest of the > content. I do get patches from people updating them, so some folks do > indeed look at them... Yes, hence the RFC. As I said, I'm happy to update the 00-INDEX-files, but if we decide not to keep them, I rather not spend time on it. Let me respin and add a few references to 00-INDEX from other files and see if we can decide what color to paint this particular bikeshed in a wider audience :) -- Henrik Austad
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
