From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.9678.1618385675472952588 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 00:34:36 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: bootlin.com, ip: 217.70.183.193, mailfrom: michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com) X-Originating-IP: 92.150.42.106 Received: from [10.0.0.9] (lfbn-mar-1-834-106.w92-150.abo.wanadoo.fr [92.150.42.106]) (Authenticated sender: michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D4CD240010; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: YP docs mailing list , "Robert P. J. Day" , "Tummalapalli, Vineela" , Richard Purdie Subject: Re: [docs] ref-manual: reverse the order of migration guides? To: Nicolas Dechesne , Paul Eggleton References: <7ff7831f-4539-8e5c-cfc6-d081651374f2@bootlin.com> <4706379.0VBMTVartN@linc> From: "Michael Opdenacker" Organization: Bootlin Message-ID: <274c25bd-700e-2ab1-22b5-c074b9d9fd4d@bootlin.com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:34:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Greetings, On 4/14/21 7:33 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:15 AM Paul Eggleton > > wrote: > > > > I guess the thinking was that you would start at the point in the > documentation where you are currently at and then follow it > downwards to the > current version. Whether that's the most logical I'm not sure, but > if we're > changing it we should give some thought to how it will be used. > People do > often go a while between upgrades, but I'll definitely agree 1.3 > is much > further back than most people would need. > > Robert suggests moving it out, I'm wondering if it's worth > considering going a > step further and turning our release notes into a proper document, > to which > this content would be added - I've often felt that the current > text-only > format is a bit restrictive. That would mean there would be a > separate > document per release, which is how many other software packages do > it (e.g. > Django). However, I'm not sure if that would cause us too much > overhead or > hassle with the other places where we currently post the release > notes e.g. > announcements on the mailing list - thoughts? (For clarity I > wouldn't propose > changing this until the next release.) > > > I have had this thought already, and like it! Especially now that we > have a 'unified' doc website, having a 'release notes' manual/section > in the left side navigation bar would be good. Here is an example I > have seen with another project: > https://projectacrn.github.io/latest/release_notes/index.html > I definitely vote for this. This would make our documentation much easier to use. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com