Re: Proposal: Abandoning monolithic Boost documentation.

From: Дмитрий Архипов (grisumbras_at_[hidden])
Date: 2025-04-23 09:19:33

ср, 23 апр. 2025 г. в 12:01, John Maddock via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>:
> As the person who used to generate those PDF's, I can tall you it was a
> right pain to do, plus there seemed to be very few downloads... that
> might be a chicken and egg situation though.  If it was all automated
> and run on CI that might make it viable again I guess.
>
> And yes, by all means modularize the docs, I don't think there were ever
> that many libraries in the old "monolithic" build anyway?

I recently collected some info on the docs setups for Boost libraries:
https://disk.yandex.ru/i/f4fRfsZFOqX4TA

45 libraries (out of 152) use integrated docs. 4 of those actually
don't even use Quickbook, their docs are written in BoostBook XML!
120 libraries' docs can be built as PDFs, of those 92 have explicit
considerations for PDF format (which implies their maintainers at one
point cared enough about PDF). 4 libraries have pre-generated docs
with PDF, that is they have PDF files committed.