Subject: Re: [boost] [range][documentation] - best practice for generating documentation?
From: Neil Groves (neil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-03 12:28:23
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Daniel James <dnljms_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 3 March 2014 16:15, Neil Groves <neil_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> You probably won't if you keep the merges simple, although cherry
> picking and bi-directional merges would cause problems. But if you
> want, I can add it to the documentation build and you can remove the
> generated html from your repo.
Yes please do put it into the build and then I shall discard the html. I
assume this is the new best-practice. I think this will be much better.
Please let me know if there is anything I need to do to make this process
work? I have some time at the moment to really knuckle down and sort this
> > I've searched and found several pages about document best-practice but
> > pages contain references to the subversion repository which leads me to
> > believe that this must be out-of-date.
> I don't think there is a page. There are some pages on the Wiki which
> are probably all out of date. If there's anything on the main site
> that needs updating, let me know.
I didn't see anything on the main site that was out-of-date. It seems to me
that the documentation being part of the build is an exciting improvement
that most maintainers would want to adopt. It might be worthwhile just to
put up a small page about this process. It might save time answering daft
questions from people like me.
Thanks for helping.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk