Re: [boost] [Boost-docs] Maintaining boost.org

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-docs] Maintaining boost.org
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-25 10:56:39

On 25 May 2010 15:15, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> At Tue, 25 May 2010 11:05:10 +0100,
> Daniel James wrote:
>>
>> The website predates both tools. Hyde would be a better choice than
>> Jekyll since Python is preferred round here. I'd be a little worried
>> about how flexible they are.
>
> Underlying technology is of the least importance.

I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. But in the case of Jekyll and
Hyde, other considerations are pretty much equal.

> I use Wordpress
> (which is PHP) not because I am a fan of PHP but because it “just
> works,” is accessible to all categories of users, and many people use
> it already.  It's much more important to pick a tool that has enormous
> momentum and support from outside our little community than it is to
> use technology we “prefer.”  That's also why I'd like not to waste any
> time trying to figure out how to do these things with C++ or
> especially with Boost.

Are you responding to me there? I've neither opposed wordpress nor
promoted C++. I'm happy for Dean to use whatever he thinks best. Most
of what I wrote was in response to his comments on the current site.

Daniel