Fiona :heart_trans: on Nostr: npub1upkp7…4tcwy I suspect there's a lack of overlap between "who could improve it" ...

npub1upkp7fd7rc3lrjg23r8gy0wc723vze7mxlx5984ut6zurjzpf5xss4tcwy (npub1upk…tcwy) I suspect there's a lack of overlap between "who could improve it" and "who has an incentive to". In the hobbyist "this annoys me, I'm gonna fix it" pattern: New Git users who are just figuring out what to do won't have the confidence and knowledge to improve documentation when they finally did whatever they needed to, while experienced Git users are already familiar with what the errors mean and don't think about it (and they might not be able to imagine where new users might stumble).

As for paying someone for improvements: In my experience, companies that just use Git will end up having someone everyone else asks (or a few someones, in a larger company), in a company with better documentation culture they might write an internal guide, but the company has no incentive to get that polished and published (sure, it might improve the skills of job candidates, but very, very indirectly). I think companies like GitHub might even have an incentive not to improve the documentation beyond the point where you can use their tools instead.

Maybe public-interest foundations or institutions of education could help there? ​