Some time ago (1 year) @Coal and I went to some considerable trouble setting up the first wiki, it was popular for about 2 weeks then interest waned, lots of things in Hifi broke and was rebuilt or removed and most of the wiki content quickly became obsolete. Hifi was extremely difficult to use and so the user-base was thin.
Its a task enough just to write a wiki, but when the details change constantly (without notice) and the wiki needs updating every week it became a full time job just keeping the wiki docs up to date reflecting the current state of the code.
This is nobody’s fault its just the nature of bleeding edge development.
This point might also help us all digest the fact that while the official docs can seem out of date and frustrating, we shouldnt be to hard on those building the code and writing docs, it is a hell of a job and the rules constantly change.
We had to let it go, it became like the docs are now, untrustworthy might be a bit strong, lets just say, a bit hit and miss.
Wiki is going to have to be a community effort, not a Hifi effort.
Even though the package says beta, I still see serious changes happening, this means writing a wiki now is still a bit like shoveling water uphill. (insert visual).