[PATCH v2 00/21] Convert hwmon documentation to ReST

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:31:14 -0700
Guenter Roeck <linux at roeck-us.net> escreveu:

> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 02:19:49PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 20:09:16 -0700
> > Guenter Roeck <linux at roeck-us.net> wrote:
> >   
> > > The big real-world question is: Is the series good enough for you to accept,
> > > or do you expect some level of user/kernel separation ?  
> > 
> > I guess it can go in; it's forward progress, even if it doesn't make the
> > improvements I would like to see.
> > 
> > The real question, I guess, is who should take it.  I've been seeing a
> > fair amount of activity on hwmon, so I suspect that the potential for
> > conflicts is real.  Perhaps things would go smoother if it went through
> > your tree?
> >   
> We'll see a number of conflicts, yes. In terms of timing, this is probably
> the worst release in the last few years to make such a change. I currently
> have 9 patches queued in hwmon-next which touch Documentation/hwmon.
> Of course the changes made in those are all not ReST compatible, and I have
> no idea what to look out for to make it compatible. So this is going to be
> fun (in a negative sense) either way.
> 
> I don't really have a recommendation at this point; I think the best I could
> do to take the patches which don't generate conflicts and leave the rest
> alone. But that would also be bad, since the new index file would not match
> reality. No idea, really, what the best or even a useful approach would be.
> 
> Maybe automated changes like this (assuming they are indeed automated)
> can be generated and pushed right after a commit window closes. Would
> that by any chance be possible ?

No, those patches are hand-maid, but I can surely rebase it on the top of
your tree. Is your tree already merged at linux-next, or should I use some
other branch/tree for rebase?

Thanks,
Mauro