Re: Proposal: Abandoning monolithic Boost documentation.

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2025-04-18 17:45:55

On 18 Apr 2025 20:31, Sam Darwin wrote:
> 
>> The main problem that was raised is that a failure in one library
> causes all the docs to disappear. 
>> No longer missing docs from problems in individual libraries.  
> 
> There is a meaningful advantage to that "problem" though. Right now
> boostorg/pfr docs are failing.  Peter and I commented to the author.
> This morning I submitted a bug fix which is just waiting to be merged.  
> Imagine the alternative: a mostly-unmaintained library starts to have
> doc failures.  The 'superproject' continues to build fine. Nobody sees
> the issue as particularly important.  Perhaps someone notices, but think
> "it's that maintainer's responsibility". The next thing you know, it's
> time for a boost release and the library's docs will not be included in
> the official archive since they are not building.      
> Which means, at minimum... set up persistent email notifications and
> show the build is failing somehow.

Perhaps, the answer to that is setting up a per-library CI that builds
the library docs. Though if the library is unmaintained, it wouldn't
have much of an effect.