Il mar 25 feb 2020, 20:50 Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> ha scritto:
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 19:10, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > I feel like we're working a bit at cross purposes here so maybe > we'd benefit from just nailing down who's going to do what and > in which order? > I am not going to do much more than what I posted today, basically only the automated conversion. > > My current thought on ordering is something like: > * commit this > * commit Kashyap's series > * commit (an adjusted version of) your split-out-the-texi series > * (automated) conversion of more texi -- all in one series I guess ? > * ??? > * profit > > but I'm not very strongly attached to that. > The main issue with this series and Kashyap's is that if we don't manage to get everything done in 5.0 we have a mutilated qemu-doc. Then either we keep it mutilated or we scramble to undo the work. So I would agree to commit the series in this order, but without the removal of the .texi files. > Perhaps we could have the files in both .texi and (automatically > > converted) .rst versions at the same time in the tree for a short > > period. If that's okay for you, I can post tomorrow a series to do that. > > My instinct is to say that that's a bit dangerous as it means > we might end up with changes to the "wrong" version of the > two files. Would it let us do the conversion faster or > more conveniently ? > It would be a kind of "insurance" against being late, basically. Doc changes are rare enough that we could manage it, I think (and as long as code review catches changes to only one version of the docs, no bitrot is possible since we would build both). Paolo > thanks > -- PMM > >
