Re: [Boost-docs] [ping]questions about boost documentation

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] [ping]questions about boost documentation
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-21 00:20:14

John Maddock wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:
>> I'm disappointed that no one who is actually doing this work
>> responded to this post. If there is some reason that my
>> concerns/suggestions aren't a good idea, I would be
>> interested in knowing about it. The whole documentation
>> initiative has progressed with almost no review or testing or
>> as far as I can see input from developers who
>> need/use the system. The fact that a couple of
>> libraries have addressed these concerns in an ad-hoc
>> way suggests that I'm not alone in this.
>> Why are things being done they way are rather
>> than the way I've suggested. Is there a real reason
>> or were no alternatives originally considered?
> Not sure, but actually I think the IDB folks are moving somewhat in the
> direction you suggest: things that should be centralised (style sheets icons
> etc) are, while library specific docs live under libs/name/doc/html.
> I suspect that Matias has been busy, given that he's been awfully quiet
> lately, but will no doubt reply in time.
> That's the way that the sandbox is organised at present anyway, and as I
> said in a previous reply to your message, some of us are already using this
> structure.

Patience ;-)... Anyway, FWIW, I'm all for Robert's suggestions.


Joel de Guzman

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:40 UTC