I am proposing we abandon the monolithic> documentation build. Many times recently, I have feltthat the monolithic docs are outdated.In fact, it can be hard to find whatyou seek in them. Since we are on GitHub, in a perfect world,I would put terse (well, as terse as possible)docs for each individual library in markdown.These can be located in the Submodule's homepage. There is no longer any need at all toproduce code listings in the docs. Thisis wasted space. Christopher On Friday, April 18, 2025 at 06:54:22 PM GMT+2, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Today, in slack, we had a discussion on problems with building the monolithic docs. For context what I'm calling the monolithic docs are these <https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_88_0/doc/html/libraries.html>. The main problem that was raised is that a failure in one library causes all the docs to disappear. That problem is due to the nature of DocBook, XSLT, and the single monolithic generation. This is not something that can be resolved at the build system leve. The one solution is to abandon the monolithic build. And instead move to only having per library documentation builds. Hence.. I am proposing we abandon the monolithic documentation build. The benefits: * No longer missing docs from problems in individual libraries. * It's modular. I.e. libraries would build, and include, their docs in the modular layout. Do note that most libraries, more than 2/3, already use modular documentation. So technically this would be completing the modular transition that has already been happening. Thoughts? -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supongas Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost