Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Documentation

[Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>]

Hi Michael,

On Tuesday 04 August 2015 17:12:47 Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-08-01 at 16:41 +0200, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > As your relatively new documentation subsystem maintainer, I think there
> > might be reason to talk about docs for a bit at the summit.
> > 
> > Currently, we have two major branches to our docs.  One, the bulk of
> > Documentation/, is a haphazard collection of text files of varying quality
> > and applicability to current kernels.  The other is a set of more
> > organized DocBook documents.
> > 
> > Despite their disorganized nature, the plain-text docs get the bulk of the
> > attention.  Anybody can manage to work with a text file.  The DocBook
> > stuff, instead, is kind of a pain.  Working in DocBook itself is less
> > than fun, few people dare to delve into the code that builds the docs,
> > and the whole thing is rather fragile.  Changing a struct to a union in
> > the wireless subsystem a few months back broke the docs build, for
> > example; few people test for such things and even fewer seem to know how
> > to fix them.
> 
> ...
> 
> > I am not convinced that DocBook is really the right tool for the job
> > here.  It is complex, finicky, and it's a real pain to have to replace an
> > entire laptop because you've worn out your shift key.  It is, I believe,
> > an
> > impediment to improvements to our docs in general.  If, instead, we used
> > something more plain-text-like, I think life might get a lot easier; it
> > could also enable the integration of all of our docs into something a bit
> > more cohesive.
> 
> Yeah +1 from me on getting rid of DocBook.
> 
> I looked at it a bit in terms of asking people to write docs, and decided it
> was too painful to impose on people.

I don't buy that. The hard part in writing quality documentation is the 
documentation, not the format. Sure, we can make formating easier, but no 
matter how good the brushes you give him are, a kindergarten kid won't become 
Picasso overnight.

> I know it's not *that* hard, but it's harder than it needs to be for the
> value it brings IMHO.
> 
> > Markdown in one of its many forms might be a good alternative here.  I'm
> > also somewhat attracted by Sphinx, which is designed for documenting code
> > already and could probably be made to work well with our existing
> > kerneldoc comments without a whole lot of trouble.  The Sphinx idea,
> > though, is hobbled by the inconvenient fact that I've not had the time to
> > develop it far enough to even have a vague idea of whether it would make
> > real-world sense.
> 
> I'd vote for Markdown. It's very unobtrusive, reads nicely as plain text,
> and all the young kids know it from writing Github README.md files.

How can we document ioctls such as in http://linuxtv.org/downloads/v4l-dvb-apis/vidioc-g-fmt.html using Markdown ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart