On 2/17/23 23:14, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
On 17/02/2023 19:40, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Vinnie Falco wrote:
We need to re-render all of this historical release notes, such as:
https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_81_0.html
to be in the style of the new website. This is being taken care of, but it will affect the release process as follows:
* Each author will edit the release notes for their library using markdown instead of Quickbook format, as a pull request against a file here:
https://github.com/boostorg/website/tree/master/feed/history
The syntax will be GitHub flavored markdown, with a few Boost-specific extensions (for example, to link against an issue in a boostorg repo).
Does anyone object or have comments about this?
The pull request workflow isn't very elegant. It would be better if, say, every author updates meta/release_notes.md in his repo, and the website automatically compiles these (as it currently does for meta/libraries.json).
I and undoubtedly others already keep their release notes in a markdown file to please github, but it doesn't live in meta/ nor is it going to.
I certainly don't, and I don't see many (any?) Boost libraries maintaining docs in Markdown. I'm not going to convert any in-library release notes I maintain to Markdown. I currently have to convert HTML to QuickBook for Filesystem, and this isn't fun. I'm not going to do this for every library now. And I sure won't ever convert docs to Markdown either.