Long ago I learned to love wikis. Mediawiki, Dokuwiki (easy to set up), or Confluence. Hardest part is to keep people from just throwing garbage everywhere--if that happens, people stop referring to the docs, and the system collapses.<p>The important thing about docs is to keep in mind the audience. This is important because it lets you estimate their mental model and omit things that are redundant: for example, if it&#x27;s internal documentation for a codebase, there is little need to explicitly list out Doxygen or JSDoc style information, because they have access to the damned source code. External audiences may need certain terms clarified, or some things explained more carefully because they <i>can&#x27;t</i> just read the source.<p>I&#x27;d say that the biggest thing missing in the documentation efforts I&#x27;ve seen fail is the lack of explanation for the overarching vision&#x2F;cohesive architecture of the work. This is sometimes because there <i>isn&#x27;t</i> a single vision, or because the person who has the vision gets distracted snarfing on details that are not helpful without a preexisting schema to hang them on when learning. So, always always always have a high-level document that describes the general engineering problem the project solves, the main business constraints on that solution, and a rough sketch of how the problem is solved.<p>Ideally, the loss of the codebase should be less of a setback than the loss of the doc.<p>I will say that, as your documentation improves, you will hate your project more and more--this is the nature of the beast as you drag yourself through the broken shards of your teams engineering.