Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boostorg wiki (Was: Re: Ignoring unused type aliases in concepts)
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-12-17 21:17:59

On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 at 22:09, stefan via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 2018-12-17 4:02 p.m., Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:57 PM Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Since it's not possible to grant git push access to the wiki alone,
> >> perhaps
> >> we should create a separate repository for the new wiki instead of using
> >> the
> >> superproject one?
> >>
> >> How does boostorg/wiki sound?
> >>
> > That sounds fine.. Except for using the wiki functionality in that repo. If
> > you are going to create a new repo, might as well make a github pages
> > project so get better looking docs.
> No, no, no, please no ! :-)
> gh-pages are certainly nice, in particular as part of a CI-driven
> pipeline to keep online docs in sync with the code.
> But they are no substitute for a wiki, for many different reasons. Let's
> not (again !) make 'perfect' the enemy of 'good'.

If the old notion of Wiki is not required, I'd stick to git repo
with collection of Markdown files and set up a CI build that runs
MkDocs and publishes stuff at ``.
Then new content could be submitted via PR.
I see advantage of having mechanism to review content.
- a classic wiki feels like it's too easy to drop any new page with
any garbage, scratch notes, etc.
A PR-based maintenance would help to avoid that.

Best regards,

Mateusz Loskot,

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at