Use proper frameworks for building dlang.org

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 1/19/15 2:49 AM, Mathias LANG wrote:
> On Sunday, 18 January 2015 at 16:41:36 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> [...]
>> I don't know. So what would be the replacement? BTW turns out that
>> dlangspec.pdf is downloaded quite a bit. -- Andrei
>
> Bummer.
> I never used it, so I figured I should give it a try before attempting
> to kill it.
> I didn't see it at first sight on the download page (which is quite
> inconsistent), but it's there.
> So I simply searched the website. First result was a link to your post
> on the newsgroup, second was this: http://dlang.org/dlangspec.pdf
> No link to downloads or specs on the first page of google results (but
> that might be different for others).
>
> ATM, it's 4 completely useless pages, and seem to have been this way for
> quite some time:
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/yqhwwpskwmkdefarjavm@forum.dlang.org
> Searching Github yield no confidence in it either (
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/687 )

That is recent. Many changes to content break the pdf build and I didn't 
have the time to fix it.

> How many maintainers actively work on the pdf / mobi version ? From what
> I can grep from dlang.org's commit, you are the only one taking care of
> this.
>
> I'm just saying a pdf/mobi version is not important, or there's no
> interest in it.
> All I'm saying is that Ali poured years of work to write and keep his
> book up to date. So why don't we use that ?

You need both tutorial and reference.

But that's beside the point. This seems to suggest the choice is "if we 
didn't have to build the mobi and pdf, the road is clear to using Great 
Framework(tm)". There are a few issues with that, such as nobody seems 
to agree what the Great Framework is, though I'd happily switch to 
vibe.d for obvious reasons if there were a champion for it; second, 
after all is said and done it's me to pay the piper.


Andrei