The repo carries two actively maintained documentation sources. docs/ is the GitBook tree, 26 pages and about 1700 lines, reviewed through PRs and recently corrected end to end in #233. The GitHub wiki is a condensed set, 22 pages and about 460 lines, restructured on 2026-08-19 to match the Stratum wiki pattern and updated since (rpm and pacman install steps, the deb auto-update correction, the SteamOS sequence with its provenance honestly stated). They overlap on almost every topic at different depths, and they will keep drifting apart because fixes land in one without reaching the other: the deb auto-update claim was corrected in both places by two separate efforts that did not know about each other.
A website is being built that renders documentation from a single source, which makes the choice concrete rather than theoretical. Proposal, open for discussion since the wiki restructure was deliberate curation:
- docs/ stays the single source of truth, because it goes through the same review gate as code.
- The wiki's unique content moves into docs/ where it is missing, the SteamOS section first since nothing in docs/ carries its provenance caveat.
- The wiki's pages are then replaced by short pointers to the website, so search engines and wiki-first visitors land on the maintained version.
The counter-argument worth hearing: the wiki's condensed style may serve players better than the fuller GitBook tree, in which case the consolidation should run the other direction and docs/ should slim down. Either direction beats maintaining both.
The repo carries two actively maintained documentation sources. docs/ is the GitBook tree, 26 pages and about 1700 lines, reviewed through PRs and recently corrected end to end in #233. The GitHub wiki is a condensed set, 22 pages and about 460 lines, restructured on 2026-08-19 to match the Stratum wiki pattern and updated since (rpm and pacman install steps, the deb auto-update correction, the SteamOS sequence with its provenance honestly stated). They overlap on almost every topic at different depths, and they will keep drifting apart because fixes land in one without reaching the other: the deb auto-update claim was corrected in both places by two separate efforts that did not know about each other.
A website is being built that renders documentation from a single source, which makes the choice concrete rather than theoretical. Proposal, open for discussion since the wiki restructure was deliberate curation:
The counter-argument worth hearing: the wiki's condensed style may serve players better than the fuller GitBook tree, in which case the consolidation should run the other direction and docs/ should slim down. Either direction beats maintaining both.