Re: [boost] Boost documentation format (was Re: Boost documentation)

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-26 12:07:17

"Jake Voytko" <jakevoytko_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:16c2caba0706260845k5206304eq19154773a71db9d1_at_mail.gmail.com...
> Gennadiy,
>
> On 6/25/07, Gennadiy Rozental <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> I personally would prefer to keep Boost.Build away from docs generation.
>> IOW
>> I shouldn't be required to know/have bjam to do it.
>
>
> I think that the inherent problem with this is from the view of someone 
> else
> generating your documentation when trying out your library (say, for
> instance, when you come to the review).

I don't think this is valid example. Library submitted for review will have 
bot hxml and html version of docs in review package

> When an individual pulls down an
> individual library that has ANY kind of documentation that has to be built
> (presuming you are not distributing the library with the HTML sources),
> you're asking the end-user to go through a two step process instead of a 
> one
> step process.

The released version of the library will have at least xml and HTML. Users 
willing to go over our head and access cvs directly will have to deal with 
doc generation. At this point it assumed one knows how to do this.

Gennadiy