Re: Sphinx integration
Dave Abrahams <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
on Mon Sep 26 2011, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz-AT-loskot.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm wondering if there is anything available, discussed or planned > regarding integration of the Sphinx [1] documentation generator. > Sphinx evolved as mainly used by the Python world, but AFAIS it has been > quickly spreading to other camps, C and C++ included. > In fact, Sphinx has not only become popular as documentation generator > but also as tool to maintain project websites where majority of the > content is fairly static and no need for real CMS. > Plain text files with source of content and cronjob do the job well. > > I have found two references in boost-docs archives, [2] and [3], > but without in-depth discussion about pros and cons of > integrating Sphinx into the Boost documentation toolset/workflow. > > Has anyone considered it? > Would it be valid to discuss Sphinx for Boost? > > [1] http://sphinx.pocoo.org/ > [2] http://lists.boost.org/boost-docs/2009/02/3797.php > [3] http://lists.boost.org/boost-docs/2010/05/4066.php Sure, it's valid. We already use ReST for several documents. However, I don't think we should get deeply into a discussion about expanding the standard tools without addressing the problem of simplifying the overall process and integrating the already-very-popular formats we have (e.g. QuickBook, doxygen, ...) -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com