The tools that I have been using in projects and $work are:
- Hugo for static site; migrating my own site, Apache Jena is on hugo, and I 
helped migrating Apache SIS and some OGC sites. Hugo is really fast comparing 
to Jekyll, and Markdown.

- sphinx; using it for Python libraries and tools, useful as it can run the 
Python code of doctests, examples, etc, making sure the docs & code are synced. 
reStructedText can be challenging but it supports Markdown too, JupyterHub docs 
have a mix of both. But probably not useful for opennlp as it's better suited 
for python
- storybook; for JS/Vue, also not great for Java.
- Some long time ago I helped the build of the performance of open source 
applications book, and from what I recall it was using pandoc and scripts to 
produce the HTML and PDF files.
I think simple markdowns in GitHub are great as that's easy for users to send 
pull requests, preview on GitHub UI, etc. Jekyll + Ruby is slow, the support 
slowed down [1], and gems/dependencies can have issues depending on the 
OS/environment. So I'd vote for Hugo or JBake (as that's what the site uses I 
think).
Not sure what's the required effort to migrate the developer documentation, but 
I have a few hours every week that I can help with that.

Thanks Jeff!
Bruno


[1] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/14/future_of_jekyll_project_engine/
    On Friday, 18 February 2022, 09:09:46 am NZDT, Jeff Zemerick 
<[email protected]> wrote:  
 
 The OpenNLP developer documentation looks nice and integrates in the build
nicely, but editing it can be a bit of a chore since it is XML documents.

Does anyone have any suggestions of other documentation tools that can fit
nicely in our build but be a little bit more developer-friendly? I don't
mind helping with a change, I just don't know what's available.

Or, if no change is needed and I need to learn to like XML that's a valid
response, too. :)

Thanks,
Jeff
  

Reply via email to