3 ms·
I personally don't see how open source authors would be incentivized to spend time integrating their Github docs with a commercial, ad-based system like SO Docs
by doublerebel 10y ago
I personally don't see how open source authors would be incentivized to spend time integrating their Github docs with a commercial, ad-based system like SO Docs.
For closed source subjects that have few resources for examples, like Obj-C, I could see a use.
However, many SO answers rapidly become outdated, especially in the less popular subjects. And the more popular subjects have some really poor questions and answers. Right now SO does a mediocre job of mediating the outdated or misinformed answers that have sat, so I don't see how that will change with SO Docs. In fact since docs are more taken as truth than random internet answers, I imagine it could get much worse.
- hood_syntax 10y ago> I personally don't see how open source authors would be incentivized to spend time integrating their Github docs with a commercial, ad-based system like SO Docs. Really, this is the entire issue. What is the point? There is already free hosting of code and docs with a high degree of public visibility. There is little to no benefit to using SO Docs and the reward goes to someone else.
- dbcurtis 10y agoA billion times yes. As a developer, I'm going to curate my documentation in the same repo as my source code. And I want my contributors to file documentation PR's to the canonical repo. I see the whole SO Docs thing a transparent attempt to monetize advertising revenue by thieving attention from the projects they purport to help. Time spent improving the documentation on SO is time not spent improving the canonical documentation curated by the project maintainers.