Re: Migrating man page to asciidoc?

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@...> wrote:
> On 06/27/2011 05:55 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> On 06/27/2011 05:58 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>> We use 2.0.6.916 on official releng releases.
>>> I tried 9999 on my private tests because [..]
>>
>> To me that leaves the question who uses 9999 for serious stuff at all.
>> In case it's no one (which we should find out) we could trash that
>> branch and fully concentrate on calalyst_2.
>>
>> I guess that sounds a bit radical at first.  It doesn't have to be a
>> quick decision.  Also, version control allows us to bring it back if needed.
>>
>> Ideas on find out who is using 9999:
>>
>>  - Removing 9999 ebuild from the tree and see who's complaining
>>
>>  - Resetting branch master to nothing but a README announcing
>>    the possible death of that thread and a request to join
>>    this mailing list and speak up about it if there is need.
>>
>>  - Asking on one/some/all of gentoo-dev, gentoo-user, gentoo forums,
>>    planet gentoo.
>>
>> After such action I imagine a time window of 2 to 4 weeks to give people
>> a chance to react.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>>> I can confirm that the build with the master branch fails as it doesn't
>>> seem able to find the spec files or doesn't accept them - the official
>>> ones we use to build weekly releases.
>>
>> That seems to further decrease the chance that someone is using 9999 for
>> real to me.
>
> One week has passed by.  Anyone?

I'm perfectly fine with the change, especially after the graphviz
dependency of asciidoc was made optional.

Matt