Subject: Re: bug#29420: 26.0; doc of `list-packages'

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 18:47:28 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:57:19 +0200
> Cc: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
> 
> > Maybe use @unnumberedsubsec instead of @section, as having it numbered
> > might confuse someone into thinking it's a node.
> 
> I could do that, but I worry that it would make the manual less consistent.

I don't see why.  The fact that this particular manual didn't yet use
that command doesn't mean anything.  Try "grep -R" for it in all of
doc/ subdirectories, and you will see that other manuals use it (and
in general you should look for @unnumbered, as there's a family of
these commands).

And having @subsection without a @node is also quite rare, isn't it?

> If we want to use @unnumberedsubsec more, I'm happy to do the change
> though.  It's your call.

I don't mind using the "normal" combination of @node and @subsection
instead, but then it will require some more glue, including submenu
etc.  I suggested @unnumberedsubsec because it's easier: it requires
less work for you.

So it's your call ;-)