Perhaps we can standardise on this? Perhaps even include some
generators for it in zproject?
I was starting to use Sphinx for Pyre as well. Now using it for
multiple projects. I'm not familiar with how it works with other
languages but for Python it's great.
On 2016-02-17 10:39, Doron Somech wrote:
> Take a look at readthedocs.org [9], it is what NetMQ is using and
> completely automated. You manage the docs in the git repository.
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Pieter Hintjens <p...@imatix.com
> [10]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, the tools we use to build the online docs are old and creaky,
>> and
>> date from long before we had neat CI automation. Meaning, we update
>> the api site manually.
>>
>> Im doing that now. I think its time we look at pushing this
>> directly
>> to github pages, from Travis.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Mario Steinhoff
>> <steinhoff.ma...@gmail.com [1]> wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I am a bit confused about the available information on libzmq
>> versions.
>> >
>> > The page at api.zeromq.org [2] says that we have:
>> >
>> > - 4.2 (master)
>> > - 4.1 (rc)
>> > - 4.0 (stable)
>> > - 3.2 (stable)
>> >
>> > On the download page 4.0 is missing:
>> >
>> > - a version-less master which "should be stable almost all the
>> time" (4.2?)
>> > - 4.1.4 ("stable")
>> > - 3.2.5 ("legacy stable")
>> >
>> > In libzmq, the NEWS file on master seems to be outdated (last
>> update
>> > in 2014). The doc folder in libzmq seems to be maintained but not
>> in
>> > sync with api.zeromq.org [3] (I checked today and some changes
>> from the
>> > last commit in that folder are not present on the site).
>> >
>> > There are also maintained stabilization forks as per C4.1 for
>> libzmq,
>> > e.g. zeromq4-x (which contains 4.0?), 4-1, and 3-x (which
>> contains
>> > 3.2?).
>> >
>> > And then there is this article: http://hintjens.com/blog:85 [4]
>> which
>> > suggests in a very compelling way that software versions suck and
>> to
>> > ditch them altogether (yes I agree) but I cant find those SBOMs
>> > anywhere so I assume that experiment did not went very far.
>> >
>> > With all this, whats the current status on libzmq versioning?
>> >
>> > Am I understanding right that:
>> >
>> > - The libzmq repository is always the latest and greatest, and
>> 4.2
>> > looks like the last version Ill ever need™, its always stable
>> and
>> > follows the raw-draft-stable-deprecated process so its also
>> always
>> > backwards compatible.
>> >
>> > - Stable releases are maintained for 3.2, 4.0, and 4.1 and
>> sometimes
>> > bugfixes get backported from 4.2.
>> >
>> > - Release notes are only maintained for stable releases?
>> >
>> > Is the outdated API site a bug or a feature? I am currently using
>> the
>> > text files in doc/ but I like to look at the fancy ZMQ logo when
>> I
>> > browse the API reference :-)
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> > Mario
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > zeromq-dev mailing list
>> > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org [5]
>> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev [6]
>> _______________________________________________
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org [7]
>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev [8]
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] mailto:steinhoff.ma...@gmail.com
> [2] http://api.zeromq.org
> [3] http://api.zeromq.org
> [4] http://hintjens.com/blog:85
> [5] mailto:zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
> [6] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> [7] mailto:zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
> [8] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> [9] http://readthedocs.org
> [10] mailto:p...@imatix.com
_______________________________________________
zeromq-dev mailing list
zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
