Message-ID: <1512545710.16419.9.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: convert printk-formats.txt to rst
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Murray <amurray@mpc-data.co.uk>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 23:35:10 -0800
In-Reply-To: <0549146F-4B62-4AFB-A29D-E4B7622455A0@darmarit.de>
References: <1512524729-16051-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc>
         <0549146F-4B62-4AFB-A29D-E4B7622455A0@darmarit.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 790
Lines: 15

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 08:11 +0100, Markus Heiser wrote:
> > Am 06.12.2017 um 02:45 schrieb Tobin C. Harding <me@tobin.cc>:
> > Documentation/printk-formats.txt is a candidate for conversion to
> > ReStructuredText format. Some effort has already been made to do this
> > conversion even thought the suffix is currently .txt
[]
> just a question .. might it be better we stay with ASCII table
> in cases like this. I guess this table won't changed often.
> The flat-table directive is good for big and therefore frequently 
> changed tables where a small precise diff reduce the patch.
> But flat-table is also hard to read in plain text. Its a balancing
> and thats my opinion, lets hear what other say ...

I think the proposed conversion is unreadable
and the original table quite clear.