1 files changed, 0 insertions, 124 deletions
diff --git a/docs/docs2.md b/docs/docs2.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 23ef61c5..00000000
--- a/docs/docs2.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,124 +0,0 @@
-# Restructure AFL++'s documentation - Case Study
-
-## Problem statement
-
-AFL++ inherited it's documentation from the original Google AFL project.
-Since then it has been massively improved - feature and performance wise -
-and although the documenation has likewise been continued it has grown out
-of proportion.
-The documentation is done by non-natives to the English language, plus
-none of us has a writer background.
-
-We see questions on AFL++ usage on mailing lists (e.g. afl-users), discord
-channels, web forums and as issues in our repository.
-Most of them could be answered if people would read through all the
-documentation.
-
-This only increases as AFL++ has been on the top of Google's fuzzbench
-statistics (which measures the performance of fuzzers) and has been
-integrated in Google's oss-fuzz and clusterfuzz - and is in many Unix
-packaging repositories, e.g. Debian, FreeBSD, etc.
-
-AFL++ had 44 (!) documentation files with 13k total lines of content.
-This was way too much.
-
-## Proposal abstract
-
-AFL++'s documentatin needs a complete overhaul, both on a
-organisation/structural level as well as the content.
-
-Overall the following actions have to be performed:
-  * Create a better structure of documentation so it is easier to find the
-    information that is being looked for, combining and/or splitting up the
-    existing documents as needed.
-  * Rewrite some documentation to remove duplication. Several information is
-    present several times in the documentation. These should be removed to
-    where needed so that we have as little bloat as possible.
-  * The documents have been written and modified by a lot of different people,
-    most of them non-native English speaker. Hence an overall review where
-    parts should be rewritten has to be performed and then the rewrite done.
-  * Create a cheat-sheet for a very short best-setup build and run of AFL++
-  * Pictures explain more than 1000 words. We need at least 4 images that
-    explain the workflow with AFL++:
-      - the build workflow
-      - the fuzzing workflow
-      - the fuzzing campaign management workflow
-      - the overall workflow that is an overview of the above
-      - maybe more? where the technical writes seems it necessary for
-        understanding.
-
-Requirements:
-  * Documentation has to be in Markdown format
-  * Images have to be either in SVG or PNG format.
-  * All documentation should be (moved) in(to) docs/
-
-## Project description
-
-We created our proposal by discussing in the team what the issues are and
-what was needed to fix it.
-This resulted in the [project proposal](https://github.com/AFLplusplus/AFLplusplus/blob/stable/docs/docs.md).
-
-We did not want to be selected by a writer but select a writer ourselves, so
-we combed through the list and reviewed every single one of them.
-We were not looking for coders writing technical documentation, but rather
-someone who is an experienced writer and has documented experience with
-structuring documentation.
-Few fit that profile and we sent out messages to 6 people.
-We finally decided on Jana because she had a strong background in technical
-documentation and structuring information.
-She had no technical experience in fuzzing whatsoever, but we saw that as
-a plus - of course this made the whole process longer to explain details,
-but overall ensured that the documentation can be read by (mostly) everyone.
-
-We communicated via video calls every few weeks and she kept a public kanban
-board about her todos, additional we used a Signal channel.
-Her changes were imported via PRs where we discussed details.
-
-The project was off to a good start, but then Jana got pregnant with serious
-side effects that made working impossible for her for a longer time, hence
-the schedule was thrown back.
-She offered to rescind the payment and we select a new writer, but we saw
-little opportunity in that, as that would mean a new selection of a writer,
-someone else with a different vision on how the result should look like so
-basically a full restart of the project and a large impact on our own time.
-So we agreed on - after discussion with the Google GSoD team - that she
-continues the project after the GSoD completion deadline as best as she can.
-
-End of November she took one week off from work and fully dedicated her time
-for the documenation which brought the project a big step forward.
-
-Originally the project should have been ended begin of October, but now - at
-nearing the end of November, we are at about 85% completion, with the end
-being expected around mid of December.
-
-## Metrics
-
-We merged most of the changes in our development branch and are getting 
-close to a state where the user documentation part is completed and we
-can create a new release. Only then the new documentatin is actually visible
-to users. Therefore no metrics could be collected so far.
-
-We plan on a user-assisted QA review end of November/begin of December.
-
-The documentation was reviewed by a few test users so far however who gave
-it a thumbs up.
-
-## Summary
-
-The GSoD project itself is great. It helps to get the documentation back in
-line.
-It was and is a larger time investment from our side, but we expected that.
-When the project is done, the documentation will be more accessible by users
-and also need less maintenance by us.
-There is still follow-up work to be done by us afterwards (web site for the
-docs, etc.).
-
-Not sure what we would do differently next time. I think we prepared best as
-possible and reacted best as possible to the unexpected.
-
-Recommendations for other organizations who would like to participate in GSoD:
- - expect the process to take a larger part of your time. the writer needs
-   your full support.
- - have someone dedicated from the dev/org side to support, educate and
-   supervice the writer
- - set clear goals and expectations