Decide what to do with redot-engine integration

[adikhoff]

UPDATE: After considering feedback from the engine team: conclusion is this feature is NOT WANTED. I'll keep this in the backlog with low priority in case the winds change (not likely).

Original

Currently (correct me if I'm wrong), an empty xml template is generated when a new cpp class appears. The developer then fills in the separate fields in the xml.

Once a week, a custom, home-made script is run that converts all the xml to rst, and sends them as a pull request to redot-docs.

My personal view is that XML is outdated and there have to be more conventional ways to document CPP classes. However I could be wrong.

• Decide if a change is wanted at all

If wanted:

• Change to what? I'm pushing for markdown across the board but looking for suggestions
• Other considerations I'm currently not seeing

[Spartan322]

We can't just change the documentation completely away from XML, its still a popular standard well understand and generally easy to read, Godot is using it which is quite relevant to minimize conflicts when we pull from upstream, and the buildsystem itself is quite reliant on parsing and dumping XMLs as part of the pre-commit process. Its also necessary for the CI checks.