On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:53 AM, David Yozie <[email protected]> wrote: > If we want to continue using the same publishing system we should > probably manage the end-user docs source in a separate branch of > whatever repo it lives in (that's assuming we can't have a dedicated > repo for the docs, which I'd prefer). The bookbinder tool really > expects to work with the entire contents of any given repo as one > document section, rather than targeting just some subdirectory of the > repo.
The current publishing system is OK for what it does, but it reduces our friendliness towards downstream consumption. Consider, for example, if we want Geode to be packaged by Linux distros (or Bigtop). That would require us to produce a -doc RPM/DEB to allow for a standalone doc packaging. If we have extra requirements like Ruby, etc. that makes it slight more complex. David, what are the chances of moving docs to a model where static html pages can be generated? Thanks, Roman.
