Re: [boost] Documentation Redux (was Re: Boost 1.36.0 release notice)

From: John C. Femiani (john.femiani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-18 08:14:20

Daniel Wallin wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>   
>> on Mon Aug 18 2008, "Dean Michael Berris" <mikhailberis-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Another option (that I think Dave Abrahams has been doing) is to use
>>> RST [0] to make writing/reading the source documentation easier than
>>> having to rely on Boostbook+XSLT (which I personally think is a
>>> brittle tool-chain).
>>>
>>> Quickbook is also a nice documentation language to use, but the
>>> reliance on Boostbook+XSLT makes it harder to pull-off. I don't know
>>> though if Quickbook can be made to generate HTML directly instead of
>>> XML. Joel?
>>>       
>> We could "easily" build a python-based BoostBook/DocBook -> xxx
>> converter.  What I'd actually do, though, is transform
>> BoostBook/DocBook into docutils' internal format, then feed that into
>> docutils and use its already-written backend writers to generate
>> whatever xxx we chose ;-).
>>     
>
> If we were to explore that path, http://sphinx.pocoo.org might be of
> interest. It's a documentation framework built on docutils, that could
> give us a uniform look and feel, plus cross referencing. Seems geared
> toward Python, but I'm sure it could be extended with whatever docnodes
> we could need.
>
>   
As a user, I would prefer the OP's suggestion of using the Trac wiki.  
Then only the server would need the LaTeX plug in configured.   Plus 
Trac already has a plug in available to include the output of Doxygen, 
and a wiki processor for RST and Docbook.

--John