Re: Sphinx integration
Daniel James <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAHOE3ycOcJYNBxm=cC=OmT6FEZ0CNaFTOTO=ihHzTQMEP-didA@mail.gmail.com> |
On 28 September 2011 13:04, Mateusz Loskot <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27/09/11 00:46, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >> >> Would it be valid to discuss Sphinx for Boost? > > Reconsidering my thoughts on that and I've come to conclusion > that a strict unification of writing documentation across all the > libraries in the Boost collection would be impossible and probably > impractical. It's more a wishful thinking of mine. > I'm also lacking of better idea(s) myself. > > I have to fight the complexity of documentation workflow > where I suffer of it myself, it is in Boost.Geometry. Well, if you can demonstrate how well a solution works, it could see more uptake. For sphinx, a good start might be to convert the existing docutils based documentation to sphinx, if possible.