Read the docs is fantastic, I used it for pyczmq and it works great. Also it's not just software or a hosting service, the author (a local here in my neck of the woods) hosts "write the docs" conferences focusing on writing and producing good documentation:
http://www.writethedocs.org/ All together it's a powerful documentation ecosystem. -Michel On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 6:17 AM, Pieter Hintjens <p...@imatix.com> wrote: > We have generators of various kinds: gitdown, mkman, which zproject > uses/plugs into. The commonality is text files that turn into man > pages and then various other formats that can be sent anywhere. I > don't think we need to *standardise* so much as decide on a format, a > host, and a safe way to upload after successful CI builds. We can have > many of these. > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Loonstra <arn...@sphaero.org> > wrote: > > 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 In libzmq, the NEWS file on master seems to be outdated (last 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 > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
