Rene Herman wrote: > On 08/10/2007 10:12 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >>> What primary requirements does in-tree Linux kernel documentation have >>> to fulfill in general? >> >> Skipping the obvious ones such as correct, up-to-date etc. >> o Readable as-is >> o Grepable >> o buildable as structured documents or almost like a single book >> o Easy to replicate structure >> o Maintainable in any decent text-editor (emacs, vim, whatever)
Low entry barrier for patches from unsuspecting occasional contributors? > Easy to put online? http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=tree;f=Documentation http://lxr.linux.no/source/Documentation/ http://users.sosdg.org/~qiyong/lxr/source/Documentation/ http://www.linux-m32r.org/lxr/http/source/Documentation/ http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/ (I admit though that formats like asciidoc or docbook are beneficial for larger documentation files which want chapters, table of contents, and internal crossreferences.) -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== =--- -=-== http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
