Use Github Pages instead of Wiki for docs

[mbrodala]

Currently the documentation is put in the Github Wiki. This will inevitably lead to outdated/incorrect documentation on code changes.

I suggest using the Github Pages feature to manage the documentation instead. This way the docs can be updated with the same commit of a change.

A more TYPO3-esque approach would be a Documentation directory with .rst files which would ensure that the docs are also available with the installed extension locally.

[dmitryd]

I do not see an issue.

Firsts, documentation does not depend much on code changes. There were many code changes in the past but the manual was updated just a couple of times and it mostly was unrelated to code changes.

Secondly, github pages are in the separate repo. so I am not sure how text documentation will update a separate repo with proper textual information.

Thirdly, I am comfortable with wiki because it is right here and it also can be cloned as a separate repo for offline editing.

What do I miss?

No any REST documentation is planned because:

• There is no normal editor for it
• There is no normal viewer/reader for it

Not worth for a free project.

[mbrodala]

No, Github pages are in the same repository but a different branch (gh-pages), thus easy to update.

I don't see an advantage of cloning two repositories (code & wiki) vs one (code+wiki). ;-)

[dmitryd]

I'll consider it :) Thanks for the idea.

[stmllr]

Obviously one cannot send pull requests for the wiki. If the documentation would live in the main git repository, one could contribute using pull requests.

[dmitryd]

There is not usable offline editor for REST files. That's the only reason, which stops me from making docs inside the extension. I am not willing to learn REST syntax and write docs manually. I could spend time in a better way.