On Thu, 15 Jan 2026, Jonathan Corbet [off-list ref] wrote:

Randy Dunlap [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On 1/15/26 7:05 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:

quoted

Jani Nikula [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

I think the tool source should be called kernel_doc.py or something, and
scripts/kernel-doc should be a script running the former.

I honestly don't get it - why add an extra indirection step here?

a. compatibility with people in the wild running scripts/kernel-doc

That is easily achieved with a symbolic link if we need it.

quoted

b. adhere to well-known naming conventions.

The normal convention is to not have language-specific extensions on
commands.  As in "scripts/kernel-doc".  I still don't understand how
making a wrapper script somehow makes this better.

kernel-doc the python source directly messing with sys.path is not
great. The python source should be able to assume the environment has
been set up, imports work, etc.

The wrapper script is the stable interface that can hide the actual
location and structure of the python packages and sources, and set up
the python environment.

While I'm not suggesting to package kernel-doc for pypi, I think
structuring it in a way that it could be is a fairly good guideline for
managing the source. And I feel like all the other refactoring and
relocation is already taking us in this direction.


BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel