On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 13:43:33 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 13:19 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > > > Despite being a generated file, HACKING has been tracked in > > > the git repository along with actual source files. As far as > > > I'm aware, it's the only generated file for which that happens. > > > > > > Times and times again, people have committed changes to > > > the source file without refreshing the generated copy at the > > > same time. > > > > > > The rationale for tracking the generated file is to help out > > > people who just cloned the git repository looking to contribue; > > > however, README-hacking already contains enough information to > > > get perspective contributors to a place where they can simply > > > look at docs/hacking.html instead. > > > > NACK, there wouldn't be no sane way to look at the file without using a > > browser. > > What's wrong with using a Web browser? If you don't want to > leave the terminal emulator, something like lynx will display > the HTML version very reasonably. I tend to prefer the old school stuff and I'm not a fan of the font we use on the web. (rabble rabble sans-serif, rabble rabble proportional). Also when rendered with lynx our broad usage of numbered and unnumbered list in that document makes the page look terrible, thus the plain text version is somewhat more readable. > Most of our documentation, both for users and developers, is > in HTML format, including things like formatdomain.html which > I think we all need to refer to way more often than the > contributor guidelines. Hmm yes, you are totally right on this point. Also what's great is that by default lynx renders that page reasonably well. Thus I'm giving you a +1  Peter  https://libvirt.org/hacking.html#committers second paragraph P.S.: Also it's worth noting that when referring to the guidelines on mailing list, it's most common to use the link to the HTML version as seen above.
Description: Digital signature