I am also pretty open to either Sphinx or Jekyll. It seems both have easy
markup syntaxes, can export static sites, are popular, and basically
support what we want.

I couldn't find mention of the ability to extract docs from C++ header
files among the Sphinx feature list, or docs. Maybe I didn't look in the
right place? That does sound like a useful feature, I'd be curious to hear
more about how it works. If it works well that might be a  good reason to
prefer Sphinx.

- Alon



On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Hamish Willee <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Bruce
>
> In my last message I wrote: "I have not used Sphinx but I will review it
> and respond properly. My uninformed 10 second view is that Markdown/wiki
> text is easier to learn and use than ReStructured text. There is also a
> real "ease of use" benefit of markdown on Github because it can be
> previewed by the author (on the site) without them having to learn the
> Jekyll toolchain. The ability to publish to PDF or ePub is great - but is
> not IMO a key selection criteria."
>
> A few hours later ....
>
> Yes, Sphinx would also be a capable tool for the job. It is a more mature
> product, with more output formats, inbuilt support for
> internationalisation, good source cross referencing, and some excellent
> extensions. It "understands" that you're trying to create a document
> hierarchy and automatically supports all the indexing and output HTML to
> support that. It has plenty of good documentation, an active community, and
> good support. It wasn't obvious to me exactly how the documentation of
> the C++ code would work, but clearly it would simplify things if we could
> use a single toolchain.
>
> Jekyll is a less "refined" product, but its documentation is just as good,
> and it has an active community and support network. Jekyll does not force
> any structure or look and feel out of the box, which means that starting
> from scratch would be much harder. However you don't have to start from
> scratch - there is an existing "good" project (e.g. jekyllrb.com sources)
> which answers the open questions. I think a Jekyll site will be easier for
> anyone to customise and understand than a Sphinx configuration. My feeling
> would be very different if the main requirement was to extract the comments
> from source code.
>
> A reason to choose Jekyll would be that it uses Markdown rather than
> ReStructured text. When hosting on Github this means authors can preview
> during development and get a pretty good idea of what it will look like
> without having to install the doc toolchain. They also have only one markup
> language to learn across wiki. This would be an advantage if most of you
> are only editing occasionally.
>
> My only concern with Sphinx is that I'm not sure how easy it will be to
> modify the themes as needed, while I've got enough experience with Jekyll
> to know I can get it to do what we need. If I hadn't any experience of
> either solution I would be leaning towards Sphinx.
>
> I'm more than happy to go with the "will of the community" as both
> solutions would be effective.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Regards
> H
>
>
> On Thursday, 19 June 2014 15:09:35 UTC+10, Bruce Mitchener wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Alon Zakai <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> We are planning to start an overhaul of the emscripten documentation
>>> soon, that is, of the contents of the wiki on github. One option might be
>>> to move to Jekyll, which is convenient as it has good github integration.
>>>
>>> If you have any thoughts on the current docs and how they can be
>>> improved, let's discuss here.
>>>
>>
>> I really like working with Sphinx and ReStructured Text:
>> http://sphinx-doc.org/
>>
>> I've used it (successfully) to produce thousands of pages of technical
>> documentation, encompassing multiple books.  We publish these materials in
>> HTML, PDF and ePub.  We've written our own extensions as needed and it has
>> been pretty easy.
>>
>> I can't say enough positive things about it and only have a few
>> relatively minor complaints.
>>
>>  - Bruce
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "emscripten-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to