Re: [boost] [iterator] What documentation is actual?

Subject: Re: [boost] [iterator] What documentation is actual?
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-27 19:01:12

On 8/27/2017 7:42 AM, Michel Morin via Boost wrote:
> Edward Diener wrote:
>> Still the entire process is very GNU and Linux oriented.
>> Maybe it can be done under cygwin or mingw(-64), but most probably needs a
>> Linux OS.
> 
> I think continuing to use rst docs makes an unnecessary burden to maintainers.
> Migration into quickbook docs might result in different look and feel in the
> generated HTMLs, but making the docs maintainable is much more important.

I agree with you but I am personally not all that keen on going through 
the qbk docs and current rst docs, and updating the qbk docs to match 
the rst docs as far as the content is concerned. If you or anybody else 
would like to do it with a PR I would be happy to switch to the qbk docs 
as the official documentation and get rid of the rst docs and its 
generation system.

> 
> Regards,
> Michel