> On Feb 4, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Kristian Evers <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> First of all, good job on this Howard and Mike. Thanks for taking the lead 
> and following through with both the admin and grunt work!
> 
> I too am +0 for this but it can easily be turned into a +1:
> 
> RTD is great and the doc versioning is a killer feature. In light of Alan’s 
> previous experiencing I’d like to have a basic contingency plan in case RTD 
> turns out to not be great fit for the project in the long run. Returning back 
> to GitHub Pages is the obvious solution to that problem. How big a pain is it 
> to redirect proj.org away from RTD again if things turn south?
> 
> /Kristian
> 
>> On 3 Feb 2023, at 23.19, Alan Snow <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> +0
>> 
>> A few years ago, I had a less than great experience with RTD due to 
>> instability and lack of ability to be able to fix underlying issues with a 
>> highly constrained environment. I have found not using it to be a painless 
>> experience. However, it seems like they have been actively developing it and 
>> it does have some nice features. So, it is likely worth trying out.

Alan,

I think the situation has improved significantly as far as customization of the 
build environment on RTD in the past couple of years. PROJ has a complex 
documentation build setup – we build the library, run doxygen over it to 
generate breathe content, and we have a very large pdflatex output. All of 
these components are handled by current RTD, which supports running your own 
Python environments along with providing the ability to modify the ubuntu- and 
conda- based documentation building environment. It wasn't painless for us 
either, but after some iteration, Mike and I got it to a workable solution. You 
can follow our journey getting it going for PROJ in the ticket 
https://github.com/OSGeo/PROJ/pull/3538

> On Feb 4, 2023, at 5:10 AM, Kristian Evers <[email protected]> wrote:
> 

> How big a pain is it to redirect proj.org away from RTD again if things turn 
> south?

Kristian,

We could go back to what we have now – a self-hosted GitHub Pages setup – by 
reenabling it and moving the DNS pointer. The downside of that it is more work 
to maintain going forward, updating it for anything but simple things must be 
done by people in the know, and multi-version docs would need to be 
hand-rolled. 

As far as I'm concerned, our proposed RTD implementation is better than our 
hand-crafted setup in all dimensions at this point. The biggest risk is the 
viability of RTD going forward, but that is a shared risk in the same way 
GitHub was before Microsoft bought it. Even so, if it went away, we could roll 
our own infrastructure as we have been doing.

Howard
_______________________________________________
PROJ mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

Reply via email to