[PATCH 0/7] doc: Python 3 compat, rst2man.py support, etc.

[David Bremner]

Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila at iki.fi> writes:

> In this series IMO the patches 1-4:
>
> id:8d518408f2da8bc96ae3123f05791142da26b9bc.1396718720.git.wking at tremily.us
> id:543aee63407956e60f85dc11a2d25855e98c10c3.1396718720.git.wking at tremily.us
> id:5e4509ab08699afe2681110fb35075e1d0bbdc7e.1396718720.git.wking at tremily.us
> id:c5ec510ac25c867ad600c475a0070a003440a4b8.1396718720.git.wking at tremily.us
>
> could go in as those are. 5:
>
> id:adce76bb9a0ca728d856da4ecaf6b282e22e7440.1396718720.git.wking at tremily.us
>
> if, for consistency reason (we don't use absolute paths with other commands
> either), rst2man/rst2man.py is used as is (and commit message adjusted
> accordingly).

I've queued 1-4 for merging. Any patches that might break the build
(e.g. 5 and 6 in this series) have to go in pretty quick if they are to
be in 0.18; patch 7 we can sort out during the freeze.

I'm not sure I completely understand the state of the discussion around
patch 5. Personally I don't like either undefined or empty RST2MAN as a
boolean a priori. I'd rather keep HAVE_RST2MAN for consistency.

d