Doxygen has 3 RC bugs preventing packages to build - is droping documentation a sensible option?
Hi,
I really want to update cimg since a long time, missing several upstream
releases but I cimg does not build due to #836168. In the bug report it
was also suggested to use sphinx as doxygen replacement but I'm not sure
how sensible this might be since upstream is using doxygen.
Since there is no real progress with doxygen (3 RC bugs no relevant
trafic) I seriously consider droping the doxygen documentation for cimg
at all and recommend users to live with the online documentation. I do
not consider this a good solution but if cimg will not be uploaded soon
this will also affect opencv transition.
What do you think about the "droping documentation since it breaks the
package build" idea?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: