Hey.

our documentation (=the stuff on neomutt.org and on our github, but not the comments in the code) is currently highly fragmented.

The Problem

files inside neomutt repo

• Small muttrc.$feature files, which document the mutt config of a specific feature.
• a huge manual.xml.head which consists - if i understood it correctly - of parts of the old upstream manual and some additions from us. That's very confusing, at least for me.
• We have multiple README files.

repo of our website

• the whole repo of our website, which in turn holds some things which are not included in the main repo and some files with kind of conflicting content.

our neomutt repo wiki

• this wiki page is a duplicate of parts of the website. The wiki page is more updated than the website
• this wiki page is a duplicate of the parts of the website. There, the website is more accurate, we have now also a devel mailinglist.

* Note*: I created a separate Issue for that.

Questions

• What do you not like about our documentation?
• How should we handle upstream docs?
• Currently, we write our docs in html and the language of the mutt manual (i don't know what its called)
  • are there things which are cumbersome/difficult to do with one of them?
  • what language do we want to use for writing docs?
• Do you have ideas on how we could improve?
• in which repo should we save our documentation?
• Do we like that our docs are build with a makefile? are there better alternatives?
• What should the purpose of our wiki be? Do we need it at all?
  • As much of the wiki is essential a obsolete/updated copy of something else - maybe we should edit only on one place and build the wiki with a script?
  • Originally, @flatcap and I thought the wiki should be the place for kind of "ideas" and such things. But currently, i consider the github issues/mailinglist better suited for that - we have tags (and later maybe milestones) there and can therefore organize it better.