From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFB77E1E for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [85.118.1.10]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33A3476D for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 11:17:01 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Kate Stewart Message-ID: <20190613111701.790e025f@coco.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20190612085405.6045d95d@lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] Documentation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Em Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:33:36 -0500 Kate Stewart escreveu: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > > > What could be more fun than talking about kernel documentation? Things we > > could get into: > > > > - The state of the RST transition, what remains to be done, whether it's > > all just useless churn that makes the documentation worse, etc. > > > > - Things we'd like to improve in the documentation toolchain. > > > > - Overall organization of Documentation/ and moving docs when the need > > arises. It seems I end up fighting about this more than just about > > anything else, but I think it's important to organize our docs for the > > convenience of the people using them. > > > > - The ultimate vision for kernel docs (for now). RST conversion and > > imposing some organization are important, but they will not, > > themselves, give us a coherent set of documentation. What can we do to > > have documentation that is useful, current, and maintainable, rather > > than the dusty attic we have now? > > Also, it would be great if we could talk about cleaning up the > documentation licensing, so it too can have its licenses be > automatically detected. :-) With that regards, I'm still waiting for a solution with for the GFDL license: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/686 All documents under Documentation/media now have a SPDX header, except for the ones that were originally licensed under the free version of GNU Free Document License (e. g. with no invariant sections, no Front-Cover texts and no Back-Cover texts) or that are dual-licensed GFDL/GPL. While we don't have a SPDX tag for those, we can't finish adding SPDX headers there though :-( Thanks, Mauro