On Apr 15, 2015 10:11 AM, "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin@scrye.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 18:00:42 -0600
> Pete Travis <lists@petetravis.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm working on a project[0] to build a documentation website using
> > buildbot. We have plenty of publican books for me to play with, but
> > I'd also like to enable other formats. ReStructuredText[1] seems
> > like a good first choice, as it's easy to learn and use (just squint
> > and pretend it's markdown, if you aren't familiar), and there are
> > processors for it at hand.
> >
> > Anerist is centered around consuming git repositories. Ultimately,
> > I'd like the site to offer the both user and contributor facing
> > documentation. I also need a repo full of RST content to bang out
> > implementation details. infra-docs.git seems ideally positioned to
> > help out here, and any time invested would carry forward to the end
> > product. Each article would need some kind of header[2] to work at
> > scale, though.
> >
> > So, what does the infrastructure team think about writing in RST? If
> > I'm willing to convert everything over, are you willing to sustain it?
>
> I think when we started infra-docs we just wanted simple...
>
> I have no objection to standardizing them to use a common markup and
> header. I'm not sure how much good they would do other people published
> out to the world, as they are very specific in many cases to our
> infrastructure, but perhaps someone would find them of use.
>
> I could see a use if there was a way to say publish them as epub. Then
> infra folks might be able to have them locally in smartphones or
> tablets in case online wasn't practical for some outage or other
> reason.
>
> kevin

epub should be feasible, given standardized markup. I could even supply those to some known location fairly soon after conversion, it doesn't have to wait for anerist's front-end generator bits to be worked out.

--Pete