Subject: Re: [boost] CMake and Boost Build tests
From: Roger Leigh (rleigh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-26 20:36:47
On 26/07/17 21:28, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
> On 7/26/2017 3:33 PM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
>> On 7/26/17 11:49 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
>>> optionally, Boost Build is used to build the documentation using a
>>> quickbook, boostbook, doxygen toolset to generate html and pdf files.
>>
>> Personally, I could never make this tool chain work despite a large
>> investment of effort. I gave up on doxygen and quickbook after
>> concluding them to be essentially non-functional. I did manage to use
>> the xml tools loaded with boost tools along with some downloaded FOP,
>> a version of XMLMind to create toolchain which is about 100 times
>> better and 1/100 as complex as the boost one for creating documents.
>> So you're life will be better when you're forced to leave these behind.
>
> I heartily disagree. Using quickbook and doxygen is a no-brainer for me,
> but there is no point of debating this. Are both perfect ? No. But using
> them makes creating documentation supremely easy.
>
> I did say that there is no Boost requirement for creating documentation
> using Boost Build. Some documentation is straight html. But for those
> libraries that do go the quickbook and doxygen way using Boost Build we
> need a CMake way of doing this if that is what the Boost Steering
> Committee is mandating.
https://github.com/ome/ome-files-cpp/blob/master/docs/doxygen/CMakeLists.txt
https://github.com/ome/ome-files-cpp/blob/master/cmake/DoxygenCheck.cmake
are one way to generate doxygen docs. I'm sure something similar to
this could be made to meet Boost's needs.
Regards,
Roger