GNU bug report logs - #29420
26.0; doc of `list-packages'

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 29420 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams <at> oracle.com
Subject: bug#29420: 26.0; doc of `list-packages'
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 18:47:28 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:57:19 +0200
> Cc: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>, 29420 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > 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 ;-)

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.