[cctbxbb] Documentation .... again

[Nathaniel Echols]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Pavel Afonine <pafonine at lbl.gov> wrote:
> I think someone needs to take the lead here. Nat, would you mind to take it?
> You said you've started doing something anyway...

Okay, I've checked in what I had written so far, converted to LaTeX,
in dox/tutorial/.  Anyone who wants to expand it, help yourself -
don't forget to add yourself to the author list.  (Keep in mind that
this will probably end up being distributed as a newsletter article at
some point, possibly in abridged form.)  The initial document is only
going to cover scitbx and cctbx for now (plus libtbx.phil, probably),
but we can add other chapters as needed.

> I've never used LaTeX, and I afraid I don't have extra time and energy to
> afford learning curve now. I would say a plain text with basic formatting
> capabilities is the simplest and most robust option. Thus I would vote for
> RST.

Sorry, I think LaTeX is going to be much more flexible.  It's really
not very difficult, at least compared to crystallography, and everyone
else seems to be comfortable with it.

-Nat