Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Build single pages with docutils (instead of Sphinx)
See original GitHub issueDescribe the enhancement you’d like
I would like a way to configure MyST from docutils.conf instead of conf.py.
Does this solve a specific problem?
I compile most of my documents using plain docutils, not Sphinx. This is because Sphinx isn’t great for single-page documents: the setup process for a new document is very heavy, and it’s strongly geared towards producing books, not articles or reports.
On the other hand, Docutils works great for short to medium-length single-file documents.
Being able to use Markdown instead of reST would be nice, but as far as I can tell there’s no way to configure MyST from docutils.conf instead of Sphinx’ conf.py, so there’s no way to enable Markdown extensions or configure MyST in any way when using the plain-Docutils pipeline.
What alternatives exist?
I’m not aware of a good workaround at the moment.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Comments:7 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
Cool. Then I will prepare a PR to explore things a bit. I wanted to make sure that it wouldn’t be wasted work. I think docutils is a great pipeline, and I think MyST is a neat language, so having more robust integration between the two would be very cool.
Also, of course, there’s the hope that we could have MyST as part of the standard docutils pipeline at some point, as was discussed in https://github.com/executablebooks/MyST-Parser/issues/347