I think changing APIs is begging for a wiki much more than a Q&A site. Facebook used to have a wiki for their api, but they went and deleted it, which I considered basically unforgiveable and proceeded to do my best to avoid having to touch the API after that.
In short, bringing back http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/ and focusing on keeping it current would be a much better start than a Q&A site, even a really good Q&A site. You'd still have the need-to-keep-with-changes problem, but at least you'd have somewhere to start from, and wouldn't keep getting referred to out of date information when googling answers.
Yes I know Stack Overflow has community editable wiki question styles, but then you just compound the problem and now need to update 100 different 'how do I [x]' questions every time the API changes.
They didn't care. They didn't have to. Now they do, because they have to. (Hello, Google+)
Facebooks API docs are improving too - so this combination of quality docs and SO could be great.
I guess the point is, if you've spent a lot of time figuring something out, and you've proved that a number of solutions on the internet are now wrong, you're tempted to make it easier for the next guy. I think this is true regardless of the medium, but SO seems to have done well at creating an environment where it happens.
Since people are already discussing Facebook API over at Stackoverflow, they might as well make it official.
Why try and build your own community when there's already an existing one with a lot of useful questions, engaged moderators and smart people answering?
Especially when you've failed to support your existing community at all.
Community wiki posts can be outright edited by low rep users, and higher rep users can edit any post.
The idea that a wiki is better for rapidly changing content is... odd, to me; it seems it'd be a wash at best. Then again I'm an SE Inc. employee, so perhaps I just don't see the difference.
Even more confusing, you can get to un-Facebook-related questions on facebook.stackoverflow.com (e.g. from your inbox, or from a user page). Since there are no redirects between regular and Facebook SO, this means that every question on Stack Overflow now has two URLs, and you might see links to both.
Why not just create another stack exchange just for facebook? I mean, they've already got that system working for other topics.
Putting a filter on all SO questions and slapping a subdomain on it feels like it's a solution they created in 30 seconds.
Second, programmers can keep their existing reputation, while a new SE site would put everyone back to 100. Since the topic is a subset, keeping it makes sense.
I don't really see what problems this solution brings that can't be solved with a custom logo.
I mean, if it was about getting more eyeballs then I think the best way to go would have been to use tagging, so that questions would be posted to 'stackexchange' and would then be tagged with 'programming', 'codereview', 'superuser' etc and as they were tagged they would show up on the programming.stackexchange.com (and other) sites. IIUC the current way is that if I post a programming question to stackoverflow, it will get 'migrated' to programming.stackexchange. That works, but it detracts from the total number of eyes because it is removed from stackoverflow.
That design decision is something that has always kind of confused me about the Stackexchange sites.
If Facebook wanted to, it is not like they can't write a question-answer site or use one of the open source alternatives. This is an endorsement of Stackoverflow from facebook. Nothing more.
Facebook treats its developers just like its users and throws out updates, new features and changes very very often. With so many users they can afford it for their users, but they need to see they can't just do that for their developers. As a user there are so many little bugs and quirks in Facebook, especially in the News Feed, that popup and a few days later disappear. Facebook needs to realise they need developers too, and that many advertisers run campaigns on their facebook pages, meaning that the API is not just a fun addon for users, but a money maker too.
Accurate or no?
They should improve the clarity of their the documentation and add more examples, in addition to keeping them updated... or pay a couple people to answer questions. God knows they have the money.
Basically, it's a siloed version of stackoverflow.com containing only the tags relevant to Facebook. They're thinking about creating mini-sites for other major subdomains (see also http://meta.webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/913/is-this-...).
Where's the benefit?
Well, come to think of it, I think google's support forums suck even more. You can post a problem on google support forums, and pray and hope for an answer from their developers.
I'm not sure that this level of filtering is quite necessary, but I think that the community fragmentation is useful: People go to each site (SO, SE, SU, Programmers, etc) with a specific purpose, and the topics on each site are broken up by tags. Trying to filter both purpose and topic on one site would be problematic.
(Also, the Unix/AskUbuntu/SuperUser debacle is a special case, IMO)
This can't hurt, but hopefully they don't see it as an replacement for real documentation.
If they are going to be unresponsive on SO as well, migrating to the SO platform doesnt make sense at all.
If you’re already a Stack O user, this will hopefully provide a focused experience if you’re also a Facebook dev. Or not. In which case it’s ignorable.
If you’re a Facebook dev who isn’t involved with Stack O, it’s a curated experience and hopefully better than what existed previous.
e.g. Facebook offers devs with over X reputation access to alpha APIs, devs with over Y reputation direct email support, devs with over Z reputation are recommended on the Facebook.com site as developers to hire for freelance work, etc.
Joel and friends, Google+? ;(
This is just providing a view of Stack Overflow that's limited to Facebook questions, and Facebook staff providing more support there. Facebook has been a login option for Stack Overflow for a long time, but don't even require you to even make an account to ask questions.
Does this mean stackoverflow will share their user data with facebook? If so, thats a disaster.
If they had data-sharing in place, they could.