I’d like contribute, but I’m also still a bit confused about the organizational structure and direction of ROS2 documentation. Given that this is a soft launch, the index site will be the main entry point for ROS 2 documentation, plus the new ros2/ros2_documentation repo, some of my decision paralysis arises from:
- What is the expected workflow for contributing new content?
- E.g. are there templates I should start from, what are the expected conventions?
- With wiki.ros.org, we used templates for adding packages, tutorials, user guide, etc.
- How does the previous wiki play into all of this?
- How should authors gauge where to host the candidate documentation?
- E.g. should it reside with closest related package?
- Or when does something warrant being on ros2_documentation?
- What if we’re writing about core ROS2 features?
- Should it instead be structured the doc folder in the core packages code repo?
- How is ros2_documentation versioned over releases and patches?
- E.g. allowing users to index through general docs wrt. release history.
- If I’m writing about features in a specific release, do we meta-tag it somehow?
There looks to be a related ticked addressing the foreboding flat layout:
I guess ROS has always been a bit different in that is not just one cohesive library, nore is merely a package ecosystem; So its difficult to pin down the documentation model to either a monolithic source of knowledge vs a decoupled sprinkling or context specific notes. Even before the index, I’ve puzzled about the asymmetry of activity and relevance between wiki.ros.org and docs.ros.org.