@wycats wrote:
I think this hits the nail on the head. The problem isn't necessarily churn intrinsically, but rather that we are shipping features without meeting all of the requirements for a new feature. Documentation is one big area where we have skimped too much.
What I think we need to do (and this is something I have privately advocated for a while), is to give the documentation a feature flagging infrastructure that maps documentation feature names to their associated Ember feature. That way, people can write documentation before the feature has landed, and we can flip a switch once the feature is ready. This would also make it easier to mandate documentation as a condition of "Go"ing a feature.
A side benefit is that it would be possible to build a "Canary" version of the guides with all of the in-progress features, or maybe even a tailored set of guides with just the features you are interested in.