https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21564070
italiano
english
français
española
中国
日本の
العربية
Deutsch
한국어
Português
RussianIt really all depends on the workflow that you and, if applicable, people working with you, are used to. More than advantages it is a matter of taste and what you are used to. For me the perceived advantages of sphinx-doc are:
- Easier editing of the files in an external editor
- Version control of documentation using a VCS (svn, fossil or git)
- I'm used to markdown syntax
But i think that for each of these points someone could argue an advantage for mediawiki, hence I think it is a matter of taste and preference.
However, if you are collaborating with non-technical people: mediawiki or fossil-wiki will be easier for them to add to the project / review pages and make corrections. By the same token if your documentation needs to be in sync with other documents (code or data) then sphinx-doc in the same version control system would have my preference.
I mention fossil-wiki because it offers a combination of both options and for some projects gives the best of both worlds. You can have wiki-pages that people can edit in the traditional sense (through an online front-end) and .wiki pages that are edited as if they are source and cannot be changed through the front end. Again, whether that makes sense to you depends on your use case and writing style and habits.
