Closed krig closed 9 years ago
I have no objections to converting this to Markdown, but others are probably better qualified to comment on whether this API definition (or at least parts thereof) isn't obsolete to begin with...
My reason for wanting to convert it to markdown is that I want to start proposing changes to it, and I don't want to edit the docbook and txt documents... :)
Another option would be to rewrite it to the RFC format. I don't know if there has been any attempt at creating a RFC for the OCF standard? That's a LOT more work, though. (Someone SHOULD do that work. Unfortunately, no one MUST do that work, so I doubt it would get done. Plus, it'd need to get updated to what is the de-facto state of resource-agents now, and there's all the things that should be integrated from fence-agents etc.)
Readable /and/ avoids duplication - thats an easy decision I reckon. If someone objects in the future they are welcome to track me down but I don't see any cause to hold you up.
Merged #1.
Thanks!
Lars
Removes the docbook and text format documents describing the Resource Agent API, and replaces them with a Markdown document.
The benefits of using Markdown over the two previous formats is that a single source document covers all use cases, making it easier for people to submit changes to the API, and avoids potential differences between the document formats.
There are other document markup formats, but none are as widely used as Markdown.