|
|
|
|
|
by simonw
702 days ago
|
|
If the deployment code needs to be able to ship different versions, I would keep that deployment code in a separate repository - with its documentation bundled there. The other form of documentation that I am passionate about is documentation that lives in issues, and then linked to from commit messages. The great thing about issues and issue comments is that they have a clear timestamp attached to them, and there is no expectation that they will be kept up-to-date in the future. This makes them the ideal place to keep documentation about how the code evolved overtime, and the design decisions that were made along the way. |
|
A well working project such as git has a Documentation directory in the same repository. That's good, but that documentation is far from enough. The most canonical documentation is the "Pro Git" book. That documentation describes not only how to use the software, how versions differ and how functionality has evolved, and the what the internal data structures look like.
That documentation does not live in the git repository, and that's a good thing, as it is not versioned in the same way. That probably goes for a lot, if not most, of good documentation out there. Insisting on keeping documentation in the main code repository would go against that.