Eric Hodel wrote: > On Jan 17, 2008, at 08:34 AM, Jim Weirich wrote: >> On Jan 17, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Hinegardner wrote: >>> Jim, you should give webby a try too : http://webby.rubyforge.org/ >> Sigh. Everytime I mention this, someone suggests a DIFFERENT static >> website generator. Who would have thought there was so much >> competition in this area. >> >> So, why webby over nanoc and webgen? > > > While we're sighing over dueling static website generators, why not > use rdoc*? > > This way users can browse documentation with `gem server` even when > they don't have the internet. > > At the very least, it would be nice if we could re-use whatever other > static files that are generated for documentation in RDoc. > > * Yes, there are various problems with RDoc, but this is a forward- > looking statement, as I have partially addressed that nasty frames > issue, and am working my way up towards doing something about > Gem::Specification's undocumented methods.
What do you think of this? http://deveiate.org/projects/Darkfish-Rdoc Regards, Dan _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
