Re: RFC: Squid documentation upgrade
Amos Jeffries <[email protected]> Thu, 16 Nov 2023 05:28:38 +1300
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.squid.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 12/10/23 03:32, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 2023-10-11 02:25, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As those familiar with Squid sources will know the documentation of >> Squid is currently spread across various formats. Some custom ones, >> and some very outdated. >> >> So far we have a casual agreement amongst the core dev team to use >> Markdown when reasonably possible. If anyone has issues with that >> please chime in ASAP, otherwise I shall continue under the assumption >> that we are good to make it "official". > > FWIW, I (still) agree that we should use Markdown as human-friendly text > input format, where reasonable. > > >> I am looking at the <https://pandoc.org/> Markdown tools as possible >> replacement of linuxdoc tools to translate automatically the following >> documentation outputs: >> * release notes, >> * squid.conf.documented, >> * the .man / .info / .pdf files, >> * the INSTALL and QUICKSETUP files > > I do not know what "translate [squid.conf.documented and .pdf] > automatically" (to Markdown) means to you in this context, That re-phrase does not make sense because it is **not** what I wrote. Specifically your addition "(to Markdown)" is wrong. Markdown is the proposed source format (in the repository). The files I listed are **currently** auto-generated from a variety of different source formats. My proposal is to change the sources to generate **from** Markdown to the various output as-needed. > especially > since (in the official squid repository) "linuxdoc tools" are only used > in release notes context. Reaching a rough agreement on what to change, > how to change it, and where to change it before changing it may be > prudent. Here are a few comments to bootstrap that process: > > * release notes: I recommend discussing changes to release notes > maintenance and structure before changing their format. It would be nice > to address several persistent problems that we often bump into when > working on release notes PRs. That is a different topic of discussion. I am specifically *not* changing the produced outputs content. > > * squid.conf.documented: The format of that file is Squid configuration > format, not Markdown. Well, yes that is the point. I am hoping the text inside COMMENT, and DOC sections can use Markdown so we can auto-generate documentation files like a squid.conf.8 or the .html more easily with links - without making the plain-text form obtuse. > FWIW, I am against changing the entire cf.data.pre > format to Markdown. I am against keeping cf.data.pre as is but > translating squid.conf.documented format (or portions thereof) to > Markdown (especially if that requires changes in squid repository). We > have discussed how cf.data.pre and friends should be restructured and > reformatted. We should finish those discussions and implement those > changes instead. IIRC we last discussed it back around 2009-ish with Henrick's proposal to split it into a set of multiple files. Are you referring to that? > > * .man, .info, .pdf files: Your call (assuming .8 and similar source > files in squid repository remain unchanged). Assumption is wrong. What I mean is that the source document gets converted to Markdown and we have the tools auto-generate the man.8, info, or pdf files from that as needed by the user/distro. > > * INSTALL and QUICKSETUP: I support rewriting these and other top-level > [A-Z]* files in Markdown, where possible. The other candidates are > CONTRIBUTORS, COPYING, CREDITS, ChangeLog, README, and SPONSORS(.list). > COPYING is not on the table since that is the mandatory GPL text not under our control. Amos > > HTH, > > Alex. > > >> This would impact anyone building Squid packages from our repository >> instead of the formal release bundles. As well as our testing >> infrastructure. >> >> The tools are GPL with sources public in github, so SHOULD be easily >> available everywhere. At the very least it has been available in both >> Debian and RHEL distributions for many years. If this change to Squid >> build requirements is an issue for anyone please speak up. >> >> >> Cheers >> Amos >> _______________________________________________ >> squid-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev > > _______________________________________________ > squid-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev _______________________________________________ squid-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev