On 4/25/23, Alan C. Assis <acas...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/25/23, Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yes, using the Documentation/ as base to create a book is a good idea, >>> but it should focus on "OS Components" and "API Reference". >> >> I don't think that the documentation should be limited to simple HowTo >> and WhatIs documentation. I think it should have some technical meat >> too! Like explanations of how things work and why they work that way: >> Theory of Operation documents. >> >> I really like Zephyr's Documentation, for example: >> https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/index.html . There is quite a >> bit of meat there; something for everyone. >> > > No, I meant the opposite, the Documentation/ is mostly focused on > Installations, HowTos, etc, it is better to be more technical. > Currently only "OS Components" and "API Reference" fit this criteria. > > I think our online Documentation is evolving slowly but it is getting > a better shape, the Zephyr documentation you cited is better organized > and reach more features. We can walk on that direction. > > It seems that their "PDF Handbook" is also based on their online > Documentation: https://docs.zephyrproject.org/2.7.4/zephyr.pdf > > Question: How we can do better, even with smaller team / resources? > Ideas? ChatGPT is not an option here :-D >
Replying myself after seen confluence pages (like https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTX/Memory+Configurations) We need some task force to move Confluence documentations to Documentation/ Xiang Xiao: about that guy that you said Xiaomi was planing to contract to help us with Documentation, do you have some news? BR, Alan
