Re: [boost] Missing Documentation on Building and Installing Documentation.

Subject: Re: [boost] Missing Documentation on Building and Installing Documentation.
From: Stirling Westrup (swestrup_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-18 11:58:54

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> AMDG
>
> On 03/18/2011 08:10 AM, Stirling Westrup wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Julian Gonggrijp<j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden]>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Besides, not all documentation is generated with BoostBook. Also I
>>> think it shouldn't have to, because in some cases such documentation
>>> systems can be too rigid.
>>
>> If the documentation cannot be automatically installed in a standard
>> documentation repository, then the current documentation system is too
>> rigid and needs to be fixed.
>
> There is no "documentation system." The actual
> rule is simple. A library must provide HTML
> documentation. What makes it difficult to relocate
> is that the documentation has links to headers and
> source files. By the time you copy everything
> referenced by the documentation, you might as
> well just copy the whole tree.
>

You may wish to revise your procedures on this then. Boost has a
reputation of rigorously testing its libraries. One might reasonably
assume this extended to the documentation. After all, without correct
documentation, most of these libraries are not very useful.

So far, my most common problem with using Boost libraries has been
documentation that is unclear, outdated, incomplete and/or simply
wrong. Its hard to be a world class library when you fail in the
documentation.

-- 
Stirling Westrup
Programmer, Entrepreneur.
https://www.linkedin.com/e/fpf/77228
http://www.linkedin.com/in/swestrup
http://technaut.livejournal.com
http://sourceforge.net/users/stirlingwestrup