From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6F53395C402 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:19:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E6F53395C402 Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id l17-20020a05600c1d11b029021f84fcaf75so1771734wms.1 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wuXZUZttfS5LarxPsoslf58vIOpQXEsr7scVhflAp20=; b=OrqDS1A6cbOQRQxGqEWcb2zfJBP8PYgq1fJWLixzUZPcxJUD4iZsYEWpAIIN5w76Gr XqUaWWTUsqGoRXnV1FPwNysUodilguSJiHwxhOGBBn6Wrk5lu+dtfsv9ozdtWaHP2pcZ A/5lbSYNnJcP76fXfbs/FsipMfRZVUeqn00TFvprw1cgHcMK8W+GLGwQ0J0VjoJPUokL F01XCl5VApxNB2VGZT7akeArr2KF4U8nEIyNCnEXZWJF8VSiFRAuCgsO1oDKwFIXIVyq mb+QSmXN/eGlDPVcU4+27e2oBCnd/EA5lZfRkLxw+Ywg909uylZVUzw5ICLF7NaYo5V9 rmSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530GVBd18MP92lGMPArFHo1r3jnabIoRqSP8WnLrF/CZhPnrjE57 LGa4/nKWEOMzG8Tp1SCTynZ99hnVPOYY1GcCE1e2BCg0KWc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzRQwZvY+6bSAKrcLKXihAOa3v9yXvwYPFCTdJJge+2SwAASpgXtqnFhUB7qKQvy1q0BR9t7nryN9tJ3GOmlWk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:2211:: with SMTP id z17mr5459262wml.17.1626185983073; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1446990946.2994.192.camel@surprise> <83r1g3aady.fsf@gnu.org> <144d27f7-9486-0515-2ebd-4e8d9d9fc3b2@suse.cz> <4988937.164lfTNWpH@excalibur> <83k0lva2hv.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: From: Jonathan Wakely Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 15:19:31 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Benefits of using Sphinx documentation format To: Richard Biener Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:19:45 -0000 On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 at 07:24, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 7:20 PM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote: > > GCC devs and users who frequently modify or refer to the HTML docs > > want to replace texinfo. One vocal objector who just keeps repeating > > that texinfo is fine should not block that progress. > > You mean one very vocal and one active developers want to replace it? Both Dave Malcolm and Martin have actually done the work to migrate to Sphinx, so that's already two before I even added my voice in favour. > I actually like texinfo (well, because I know it somewhat, compare to sphinx). > I think it produces quite decent PDF manuals. I never use the html > output (in fact I read our manual using grep & vim in the original > .texi form ...). > > But then I'm mostly of the who-does-the-work-decides attitude - so if there > are people driving a transition to sphinx because they want to improve sth > and they don't manage to do that with texinfo (for whatever reason) then OK. > As long as it doesn't regress my personal usecase (I hope the sphinx > docs are still > digestable in source form, which I understand they are). Sure, it's very much intended to be readable in the "raw" form, not just the generated output.