GNU bug report logs - #56145
[PATCH 0/5] Add menus to Services sub-sections

Previous Next

Full log

Message #35 received at 56145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com>
Cc: 56145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#56145: [PATCH 0/5] Add menus to Services sub-sections
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 22:08:47 +0200

Hi,

Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel <at> crazy-compilers.com> skribis:

> Am 03.07.22 um 12:38 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>
>> I’m less convinced about this one.  I wonder if, instead of adding
>> anchors, we should add proper sectioning at the same level as the
>> existing sections (“Base Services”, etc.).
> I don't actually understand what you mean. Currently each section
> described one or more services. The section groups the services into
> „all LDAP related‘, „all X11 related“, etc. This patch basically adds
> the anchors, whereas the other patch uses the anchors that already
> exist. So basically they result in the same.
>
> Do you suggest to split „Base Services” into several sections? (Like
> „Console service“, “Randow data services‘, etc.)
>
>> Also, I don’t think we need one section (or anchor) per service:
>
> Having a TOC of all services is my actual intention. I want to have a
> list which

(Incomplete sentence.)

To be clear: I think we must not abuse sectioning to make an index;
there’s already an index, and we can add concept index entries if that’s
what’s missing.

However, what we could/should do is improve structure.  We can do that
by grouping related services together, essentially splitting existing
sections into finer-grain sections—e.g., ‘Base Services’ might be split
into two or three sections.  That’s not the same as adding one heading
and one anchor for each service.

Does that make sense?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

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