Gilles Lenfant wrote:
May I suggest to use Sphinx to structure all this (table of contents,
code coloration, search engine, glossary, index...) ?
No. :-)
Sphinx is a nice technology, but we have a full blown CMS on our website
you may've heard of. :)
We really don't want to see a proliferation of technologies for managing
documentation, or a split of content across multiple systems that don't
integrate well. There are lots of difficulties with having multiple
technologies and having statically generated files, e.g. how do you do
"related items" between articles easily? how do you do review workflow
on documentation? how do you do metadata like 'start here' or version
information? how do you generate relevancy-based pages e.g. to do a
search by Plone version? how do you guarantee that people searching for
documentation find what they're looking for if the data's in two places?
I'm sure all those things are solvable, but it doesn't serve anybody
well to switch out our technology, and something that's ultimately based
on svn and generating static files is a lot less accessible to some of
our doc team members who are not developers.
Most Python based projects - including Python itself - are documented
with Sphinx.
Plone is so much more comprehensive than these projects, though, and we
have a strong reliance on community-contributed documentation, which the
PHC facilitates better.
Martin
--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
_______________________________________________
Product-Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/product-developers
