I believe we may have talked about documentation fragmentation a year or two ago, but I can't recall exactly. Today someone asked on the firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list about getting an add-on on the community site, and it got me thinking.
In the recent alterations to NVDA Add-on Template, the bitbucket link to the instructions for getting an add-on approved through the review process, was removed.
That was quite appropriate, since that document was old, confusing, and not entirely accurate.
However it was the only linked guide for the process that was available.
There was also a similar document on addons.nvda-project.org, somewhere, but it is not publicly linked.
This information does not appear in the Add-on development guide, as far as I can tell.
At the moment, the dev guide links to the add-on template. The add-on template links to nothing.
I am aware that somewhere, on one of the Wikis, there is a document about this, but I don't know how official that is. Nor do I have a link for it at the moment without searching.
My point is: shouldn't we be making this process a little more transparent for new developers, by providing links to some written guidelines for how the process works, in common places where a developer might expect to find them?
I am tempted to write up a summary temporarily for the dev guide, just so there is something, but I wanted to find out what I may be missing.