Re: [boost] [release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching

Subject: Re: [boost] [release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching
From: Raffi Enficiaud (raffi.enficiaud_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-23 19:22:59

On 23.10.18 21:02, Stefan Seefeld via Boost wrote:
> On 2018-10-23 02:58 PM, Raffi Enficiaud via Boost wrote:
> 
>>
>> I cannot agree more. Also, I consider docbook as a perfect example of 
>> extremely complex API, and this is why I am very happy with quickbook.
>>
>> What is your feedback on asciidoc? would you recommend it?
> 
> Could we possibly get more off-topic ? The original discussion was about 
> supporting *build systems*. 

No. "[release] 1.69.0 deadline for new libraries approaching" is the 
title of this thread.

I pointed you to cmake scripts that I wrote and that support building 
quickbook documentation.

Have you tried those scripts?

What tools you (or anyone else for that
> matter) prefer is entirely irrelevant in that context, precisely because 
> a build system needs to support them all.

I remember some people interested in asciidoc, and I believe Rene Rivera 
is/was one of them. As "a build system needs to support them all", I am 
asking if he would recommend it, to know if this should be supported in 
the future.

Is there anything wrong?

R.