From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:18:28 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Jiri Kosina Message-ID: <20170626161828.3914fcc1@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20170623123936.42dab05f@lwn.net> <20170624074641.4820fecd@vento.lan> <1779146.rtcHP5MkoH@aspire.rjw.lan> <20170624104142.70677fcb@vento.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , ksummit-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Documentation issues List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 25 Jun 2017 22:56:07 +0200 (CEST) Jiri Kosina wrote: > Unfortunately option (3) has also been applied to some of the files: > > $ ll Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt > ls: cannot access 'Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt': No such file or directory > > I wasn't sure whether this was intentional or not. But if not, I'll > happily send a patch that introduces a symlink. Worries about moving well-known files are why I delayed some of this stuff a bit so I could bring it up at conferences and the kernel summit. It only proceeded after I didn't get any real pushback in those settings. In general, we move files around in the kernel tree all the time. We don't normally leave symlinks behind; indeed, we never do. Instead, we figure out where the file moved to and get on with life. Are documentation files somehow different, needing different rules in this regard? I wouldn't mind some clarity on that point. My hope (cue inspirational music here) is that, someday, it will be possible to type "ls Documentation" and get back a reasonably sized listing that is easy to explore. Let's just say that's not the situation at the moment. Getting there will certainly involve moving files around; replacing them with symlinks or pointer files would, to a real extent, defeat the purpose. jon