Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.5.3-rc4

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Steven Grimm [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Am I correct in observing that "*roff -man" and HTML are the only
two output formats we care about, or do people use other formats in
their private branches?

I obviously do not speak for others, but the only format I care
about personally is the *.txt one.  We picked asciidoc primarily
because the source language was readable.

[...]

It might be more worthwhile to research what other "Text-ish
lightweight mark-up" systems are availble, and if there is one
that is more efficient and can go to at least html and man,
one-time convert our documentation source to that format using
your Perl magic.  The minimum requirements are:

 * The source is readable without too much mark-up distraction;

 * Can go to roff -man;

 * Can go to html.

Naturally I am biased, but Texinfo might be an option.  The source is
editable without too much distraction, one can generate HTML, printed
output, cross-referenced info files (those are really convenient for
Emacs users), cross-referenced PDF output.  For man pages, one could
follow the path outlined in
<URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Man-Page-Generation.html>.
That is probably the weakest point.

Plain, user-readable ASCII text without any Texinfo markup can also be
generated.  One can even include images in info, PDF and HTML and have
those replaced by ASCII art in the plain text output.

There are some disadvantages: AFAIR, utf-8 characters will in general
not fly.  One needs to code accented characters more or less
explicitly.

Texinfo conversions are fast.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum