On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, James Curran wrote:
> "Douglas Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > -- Footer should have a "revised" date. I like the horizon rule,
> too.
> >
> > A "generated" date would be easy; a "revised" date isn't so easy, because
> it's
> > not trivial to figure out when something used in the list changed.
>
> How 'bout a separate build step which just scans the doc source
> directory tree and builds an XML file of filenames & modification dates.
> Then that file could be used to include revision dates in the docs.
Adding another build step makes me nervous. As it is, BoostBook already
requires an additional tool (an XSLT processor), and if we make the build
process any more complicated we will harm the chances of BoostBook
adoption.
[We should move this discussion over to the boost-docs list exclusively]
Doug
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
