Jeff Garland wrote: > I saw your dblatex sample -- it looks nice...I'm hoping this path > succeeds b/c > I agree FO isn't a good solution. While we're making a list of > Jamfile issues, > here's one other problem, I think, with the current Jamfiles -- no > easy way to > run only a single library. The reality is that a full Boost.pdf > would be so > big as to be unusable (date-time with full reference is ~500 pages).
100% agreement here. The current situation doesn't even remotely scale well. It's useful to have all the docbook docs built nightly, but IMO we need a way to achieve this without having one monolithic document. There's another issue here too: I've spent quite a bit of time messing with xslt options to get the math-toolkit docs looking nice (TOC depth and so on). If these docs are merged into the current structure (assuming the lib makes it into Boost), not only will these options get lost, but I fear the current rather monolithic structure would render the docs virually unreadable. Is there any way for us to say in bbv2: "If you build from here, also go and build here" ? John. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
