To secure longer-term viability of the documentation (and forum), I'd suggest that RST be dropped, and that all documentation is parsed using markdown instead.
As much as I personally prefer the feature-set of RST (due to the clear extension capabilities, as well as the well-defined, parseable structure), clearly it lost the text-format war and thus finding people that are willing to invest in it will grow harder and harder over time. The same applies to tooling that will continue to bitrot, and it's such a bother to remember the differences, this forum included. To get an idea of how things are developing, here's the google trend: [https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0jt0gkj,%2Fm%2F036gl7](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0jt0gkj,%2Fm%2F036gl7) Like HTML, the intent of markdown is that it parsing should degrade gracefully - thus any respectable markdown parser will be able to produce at least a decent looking version of the current documentation, as is. Further, looking towards editors like HackMD, one can see that the amount of tooling to do graphs, figures, math etc is growing in the markdown space - again, this will allow the production of higher quality documentation with less effort and maintenance. There's never going to be a better time to do this - my hope would be that with increased popularity, more documentation will appear, and the chances of that happening will improve if the barrier to writing high-quality docs is low.
