[dnmfarrell]

> It doesn’t matter how good your product is, because if its documentation is not good enough, people will not use it.

Eh docs aren't that important; we've all used badly documented libraries before. Would better docs help? Sure, but let's not overstate their value.

The framework looks like a useful writing aid though.

[hrktb]

The interesting part to me is the notion of cost for the product: how much you pay upfront, or how much you intend to pay in integration work etc.

With cost in mind, documentation quality brings the total cost up or down and can change the calculation entirely. It’s also implicitly taken into account when a team builds a POC and reports the time spent on it. Depending on if it took 3 weeks or 5 days, it will be a completely different perspective.

[jmalin]

Depends on the product and the competition.

If no other library suffices, then customers will use yours. But they'll hate you. Over time, they might stop using your other contributions, even if they don't have any other choice.

In other words, would better/faster/more easily modified code help? Sure, but let's not overstate its value. We've all used badly designed code before. /s

[kaycebasques]

I agree that it's overstated: people will use it if forced, even if the docs are terrible or non-existent. Companies like Stripe are examples of how transformative a good docs experience can be, though.

[FriedrichN]

>we've all used badly documented libraries before

Sure have, way too often. But if there's a choice, I'll pick the one with proper documentation every time (unless it's absolutely inferior of course).

[paul_manias]

You say that like someone that is yet to experience the absolute hell that is OpenSSL 'documentation'.