Re: [PATCH 1/2] asciidoctor: fix user-manual to be built by `asciidoctor`

>> [1] I think we've also traditionally considered asciidoc to be the
>>     definitive toolchain, and people using asciidoctor are free to
>>     submit patches to make things work correctly in both places. I'm not
>>     opposed to changing that attitude, as it seems like asciidoctor is
>>     faster and more actively maintained these days. But I suspect our
>>     build chain would need some improvements. Last time I tried building
>>     with AsciiDoctor it involved a lot manual tweaking of Makefile
>>     variables. It sounds like Dscho is doing it regularly, though. It
>>     should probably work out of the box (with something like
>>     USE_ASCIIDOCTOR=Yes) if we expect people to actually rely on it.
>
> Yes, that would probably be beneficial.  I'll see if I can come up with
> some patches based on Dscho's work.