skytin1004

Over the past few weeks, I reached out to around 15 maintainers and founders from DevTool projects to ask a simple question:

Why do so few developer tools maintain multilingual documentation?

I expected to hear complaints about translation quality or tooling limitations. Instead, the most common answer was much simpler: most teams intentionally avoid localization.

Across many fast-moving DevTool projects, the lifecycle of documentation translation often looks like this:

project grows → community starts translating docs → source docs evolve quickly → translations drift → maintainers stop maintaining them → docs return to English-only

Several maintainers told me they had experimented with translation platforms or community-driven localization in the past. But keeping translations synchronized became difficult as documentation and APIs evolved rapidly. Eventually many teams chose to revert to English-only documentation.

In fast-moving DevTool teams, documentation changes frequently: APIs evolve, installation steps change, configuration examples update, screenshots and diagrams become outdated. When documentation changes weekly, translations can quickly fall behind. Reviewing translation pull requests also adds extra work for maintainers.

Instead of maintaining official translations, many teams rely on a simpler structure:

official docs → English community tutorials → other languages

Developers around the world often write guides in Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, and other languages, but these usually live outside the official documentation. This lets teams move quickly without adding localization maintenance overhead.

One interesting pattern from these conversations was this:

translation drift is a known problem ≠ teams are willing to pay to solve it

Even when maintainers acknowledged the issue, localization rarely ranked high enough to justify engineering time or tooling investment. Shipping features and keeping documentation current usually mattered more.

As developer tools grow globally, unofficial translations tend to appear naturally. At some point teams may want a way to keep multilingual documentation synchronized without slowing down development.

For now, though, many fast-moving DevTools seem comfortable with a simpler strategy: English-only documentation plus community translations.

Curious if others working on DevTools or documentation infrastructure have observed the same pattern.

I’ve been reviewing documentation strategies across several globally adopted DevTools and OSS projects.

One pattern stood out.

Even products with large user bases across Asia, Europe, and Latin America often keep their official documentation English-only.

Some projects experimented with community translations in the past. But as release velocity increased, translations gradually fell out of sync. Eventually, many reverted to English-only.

This raises two different possibilities:

1. Localization is valuable, but maintaining it does not scale in high-velocity projects.

Frequent releases mean documentation changes constantly. Keeping multiple languages synchronized introduces review overhead, validation work, and operational complexity.

For fast-moving teams, English-only may simply be the rational trade-off.

2. Localization may not be strategically critical for DevTools.

Developers are generally comfortable reading English documentation. Core ecosystems (Stack Overflow, GitHub issues, RFCs) operate primarily in English.

If multilingual documentation does not materially affect activation or revenue, prioritizing speed might make sense.

For teams that ship frequently:

Is documentation localization strategically important?

Have you seen multilingual docs meaningfully impact product metrics?

If localization could stay aligned with each release without slowing the team down, would it change your decision?

Curious how others think about this trade-off.