Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 8
    No matter how many examples you can list for badly documented open source projects, in my opinion, the claim that they "are crippling their documentations on purpose" needs to be supported by conclusive evidence (and even then it probably doesn't hold as a general statement). Commented Dec 1, 2014 at 13:32
  • @O.R.Mapper Lets start with "Bluez - greatest linux mystery". As the only bluetooth library for linux, I find it hard to believe that it as not documentation because it is an extra effort. Hell, there is doxygen, and how hard is to write simple tutorials? Commented Dec 2, 2014 at 12:06
  • @O.R.Mapper Then there is linux kernel. If you are missing something (like a kernel driver), if your company is missing the expertise, you can either hire someone, or find a freelancer or a company that will do it for you. So, it is open source, but it is coming with a price Commented Dec 2, 2014 at 12:08
  • @O.R.Mapper Then there are open source project, with documentation in paper format. So you buy a book, and there are given no other documentation. Is this documentation crippling, or not? Commented Dec 2, 2014 at 12:10
  • 2
    For what it's worth, i've seen enough profiteering off of shoddy documentation to at least wonder whether it's intentional. When the same groups putting half-assed documentation online are more than happy to sell you a book or a training class, it doesn't take much cynicism at all to reach that conclusion.
    – cHao
    Commented Dec 2, 2014 at 14:27