[Rubygems-developers] Docs found by google seem old.
drbrain at segment7.net
Fri Jan 18 21:09:31 EST 2008
On Jan 17, 2008, at 08:34 AM, Jim Weirich wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Jeremy Hinegardner wrote:
>> Jim, you should give webby a try too : http://webby.rubyforge.org/
> Sigh. Everytime I mention this, someone suggests a DIFFERENT static
> website generator. Who would have thought there was so much
> competition in this area.
> So, why webby over nanoc and webgen?
While we're sighing over dueling static website generators, why not
This way users can browse documentation with `gem server` even when
they don't have the internet.
At the very least, it would be nice if we could re-use whatever other
static files that are generated for documentation in RDoc.
* Yes, there are various problems with RDoc, but this is a forward-
looking statement, as I have partially addressed that nasty frames
issue, and am working my way up towards doing something about
Gem::Specification's undocumented methods.
More information about the Rubygems-developers