I really wanted the wiki to at minimum have directories so they would be easier to structure and allow even for major versions that are maintained in parallel.

The section “How about the reasons not to use the wiki?” is written rather confusingly. It mixes points that apply to the wiki (“The documentation isn’t available locally when someone clones your repo”) and points that apply when not using the wiki (“Documentation edits get the same treatment as code”) without making it clear which one is which – you have to infer it yourself.

> You can get to the wiki contents in a single click from anywhere in the repo There is no 2.

2. Non-technical people can work with tools they know.

3. You may not want to deal with pull, push, merge for every edit.

4. You may not want to deal with PRs for every edit.

5. Setting up `/docs` takes work. Wikis are just there.

Mintlify and others turned this sort of convenience into a business.

The GitHub wiki is not a real wiki. It cannot be edited by most people.

How do people deal with log files, images, excel files, pdfs and other binary data which they need for documentation. Do you just put everything into the repo at /docs ?

If you make the wiki an actual Git submodule, the main repository does pin a specific wiki commit.

To consider, there are different docs:

in repo (can be wiki format):

- dev docs

- user manual

different repo:

- community usage wiki

i was going to say the biggest reason wasn't mentioned here, that github sets Disallow: /*/wiki*

however I think maybe this has changed? I don't see it in https://github.com/robots.txt now

In Gitlab the wiki is just a separate git repo. Is this not the case with GitHub?