On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:21 AM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
wrote:

>
> > Again, the question is: what problem are we trying to solve?
>
> Org boasts itself as a format to write, among other things,
> documentation. Do you think it is confidence-inspiring if we do not
> write our own documentation in our format? See also
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food>. This problem
> is now solved.
>
> Also, no matter how you look at it, doing any non-trivial edit in
> "org.texi" is painful. I want to ease that pain for current contributors
> (at least me), too.
>

+1 Editing Org is so much natural than .texi. And by this flow, we are not
obsoleting .texi, just having it generate automatically instead of
manually. It like writing a higher level language like C or Python instead
of tinkering in Assembly.


> Also, I'm not suggesting to get rid of "org.texi". I'm suggesting to
> generate it from "manual.org" and to avoid as much as possible editing
> it manually thereafter. In practice, this change is so small that I do
> not understand what all this fuss is about. This should be simple: move
> "manual.org" to doc/, overwrite "org.texi", and, when we feel confident
> enough, if it ever happens, remove "org.texi" altogether from the
> repository, generating it only before bundling a new Org release or
> merging it with Emacs.
>

Exactly. Emacs will anyways ship with org.texi. So moving the manual source
to Org in the Org repo shouldn't concern the Emacs repo.
-- 

Kaushal Modi