Hi,

a bit surprisingly for myself, it looks like being a hard task to find
relevant information about Coda even when I know most of the expected answer.

We have reached the stage when there are more Coda "users" than
"veteran users", that is, more and more people are trying to deploy
Coda without being on the mailing list for a long time.

The list has served as the ultimate source of the authoritative documentation,
overriding man pages and the web site. That why some of us (say myself)
did not really experience the faults of the documentation.

No surprise documentation lags, when the main developer has to divide his
time between the actual fixing Coda and rewriting the docs (which is always
a moving target).

I suggest one and rather limited action - to clearly mark all documentation
on the Coda site as obsoleted (and possibly fix one or another document,
adding a date at which it was up-to date. This second part is optional,
given the lack of resources...). It does not mean the documentation is wrong,
just that nobody would expect it to be authoritative - which it isn't.

Then we can expect that the community (or even the developers) will make an
effort and extract the relevant bits out of the mailing list archives
(otherwise hard to use for finding the relevant descriptions and micro-howtos)
into a Wiki or alike.

Coda is quite exhaustively documented (!), though alas the bits
are all disparate.

The project maturity has overgrown its documentation's one.

My 2c
--
Ivan