Re: [Boost-docs] Sphinx integration

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Sphinx integration
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-28 14:34:02

On 28/09/11 15:16, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> on Wed Sep 28 2011, Mateusz Loskot<> wrote:
>> On 28/09/11 13:24, Daniel James wrote:
>>> On 28 September 2011 13:04, Mateusz Loskot<mateusz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> On 27/09/11 00:46, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>>>>> Would it be valid to discuss Sphinx for Boost?
>>>> Reconsidering my thoughts on that and I've come to conclusion
>>>> that a strict unification of writing documentation across all the
>>>> libraries in the Boost collection would be impossible and probably
>>>> impractical. It's more a wishful thinking of mine.
>>>> I'm also lacking of better idea(s) myself.
>>>> I have to fight the complexity of documentation workflow
>>>> where I suffer of it myself, it is in Boost.Geometry.
>>> Well, if you can demonstrate how well a solution works, it could see
>>> more uptake.
>> Good point.
>>> For sphinx, a good start might be to convert the existing
>>> docutils based documentation to sphinx, if possible.
>> What you mean as docutils?
> Docutils == ReStructuredText, for all intents and purposes.

I understand the alias. Sphinx uses docutils, thus docutils name can
alias Sphinx to some extent.

Best regards,

Mateusz Loskot,
Charter Member of OSGeo,
Member of ACCU,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC