Subject: Re: [Boost-build] New docs: Go or no-go?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-27 19:36:00
On 2/27/18 11:23 AM, Rene Rivera via Boost-build wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Robert Ramey via Boost-build
> Yes, you've mentioned all that before :-) And I concur that all of those
> are good points. But perhaps you failed to notice previously where I
> mentioned, and illustrated, taking this same documentation and feeding
> it into our DocBook processing chain
OK - I either forgot this or never got it. In any case, this seems
pretty good to me. That is, it leaves boostbook/docbook but users
you're own choice for addressing the XML preparation. No problem with that.
Other recent documenation efforts, (Hana, MP11) seem to avoid
boostbook/docbook all together. I think this is a very bad trend.
> On another point though.. Part of the documentation change is to prepare
> for making B2 truly independent of Boost.
This will likely be the best thing for B2 and likely would have been
very valuable to B2 in the past. A tool which stands on it's own with
it's own fan base is inherently much stronger than something which
depends upon something else.
> -- Rene Rivera
> -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
> -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net <http://robot-dreams.net/>
> Unsubscribe & other changes: https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk