View Single Post
Old 04-16-2013, 01:45 PM   #137
eureka
but forgot what it's like
eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eureka ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 741
Karma: 2345678
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: north (by northwest)
Device: Kindle Touch
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave2008 View Post
But the down side is also it's in source tree, so other users cannot help improve it without knowing Git and Github.
Files in Git repositories on GitHub could be fully edited with the help of web-interface only.

There is an example of this feature usage at the page about integration of ReadTheDocs with GitHub.

There are also various web-based text editors supporting editing text content from GitHub repository online without cloning to local computer (like prose.io, c9.io).

You can also evaluate number of users that already contributed to documentation on wiki and predict whether strategy of keeping status quo will change the situation

Anyway, for now source and output formats of documentation aren't so important. Content is. And nobody could document new (and forgotten) features except developers. So if current workflow is comfortable for developers, I do agree with keeping it as a base for new ways of documentation producing.
eureka is offline   Reply With Quote