NorESM3: Continue with read-the-docs for documentation, or is there a reason to switch to something else?

[TomasTorsvik]

Hi All,

we should start the work on documenting NorESM3 soon. Before we get started, I would just like to sound out if we should continue using the read-the-docs framework that we have been using for NorESM2, or if there are any good arguments to move to something else?

Personally, I don't know of any reason to move away from read-the-docs, but that is mainly because it is what I'm most familiar with. Does anyone have user experiences with other options? I would not want to switch just for the sake of doing something new, but it's best to clarify this before we get started. Please leave a comment here by the end of January if you have an opinion on this.

[gold2718]

I second sticking with read-the-docs but have not spent a lot of time looking at alternatives. We know it works and will support both our new and old version needs.

[TomasTorsvik]

As there have not been any comments to the contrary, I think we can decide to stick with our current read-the-docs system for the NorESM3 documentation. I'm closing this discussion.