#cuberite

@PaddyMac I'm afraid I'm not too knowledgable with cmake and the build system.

LogicParrot: I created an issue on the book repo with a suggestion about a versioning system, what do you think?

Sounds overkill to me.

It's a great idea for stuff where history is critical.

Can you propose a better (and implementable) system? The system proposed so far is easy to implement, so idk.

What's wrong with your proposed <a href="derp123"></a> system?

We'd put such a tag in every 1st line of all subsections. And the script would need to be modified a bit in order to read them for the toc

You didn't like it, it's more work to maintain, and it doesn't defend against sections being removed or replaced. I think a better system would be to just use the title as the id, and not change the titles.

I don't remember not liking it. The extra work is negligible.

It indeed does not defend against removed sections.

But do we need that? Most online manuals do not have all history available and they do just fine.

Both methods would work, and I think the derp123 method is an order of magnitude less work.

For not much loss.

OK

I wouldn't mind title as id as well. As long as we're careful with titles.

well if you could write down your thoughts in the GH issue, I will get back to you later after I've thought over it a bit more.

Sure.