Why Meta? Toolhub's intended audience includes non-technical people so Meta makes sense, but this is a purely technical project for technical users so having its documentation in Wikitech helps keep everything in one place.

In T320424#8305160, @taavi wrote:

Why Meta? Toolhub's intended audience includes non-technical people so Meta makes sense, but this is a purely technical project for technical users so having its documentation in Wikitech helps keep everything in one place.

No strong opinion there, but being meta-information about the project (how it's organized, etc.) seems to fit better in Meta, the user docs for sure will go in wikitech no matter what.

It also feels clearer to me that one is information about the project organization and the other for users if they are clearly split, but using different pages with clear indications in wikitech might do the trick too.

I don't have a strong opinion on where such documentation should go either, but in my mind, most projects have three categories of information. Taking Toolforge as an example, we have:

• User-facing documentation: e.g. how to set up a Toolforge account, how to run a webservice or job, where to find the logs, etc.
• Developer-facing docs: info about how to administrate, troubleshoot, add features to Toolforge, etc.
• Project meta: of interests to both end users and devs/admins; design docs, decision requests and records, progress reports, etc. Essentially, what @dcaro enumerated in the task description.

The first two clearly belong on Wikitech, in my opinion. Where to put the third one may be a matter of taste more than anything, and not necessarily linked to how "technical" the audience of the project is. I'd love to hear other people's arguments in favor of one or the other. @bd808, what made you decide to put Toolhub's docs on Meta?

In T320424#8306422, @Slst2020 wrote:

@bd808, what made you decide to put Toolhub's docs on Meta?

I (well, actually Harej) put Toolhub's project content on metawiki as the project is a cross-cutting concern for the Wikimedia movement. Toolhub has some integration with Toolforge things, but it has a bigger purpose than only documenting Toolforge projects. The docs on meta started with open discussion with the Wikimedia community (communities!) about many aspects of the project, and meta is generally the preferred wiki for those kinds of documentation.

The only WMCS projects that I can think of that have/had significant documentation on metawiki were Quarry and PAWS. Both largely started as collaborations between Yuvi and the WMF Research team. Research's team and other docs were on metawiki at the time (and still are as far as I know) so putting docs about these applications there also seemed reasonable to folks. The PAWS docs all got moved to wikitech during the last major documentation update, but Quarry's docs are still on metawiki.

After some discussion, it seems that wikitech might be a better place for it, the content though should be the same :)