Some of the services appear to live directly within this repo. There's also separate apps (that are separately packaged via docker, and referenced in the docker compose) elsewhere in the same GitHub organization
See the docker-compose.yml for an overview of the services that this repo is meant to enable running. Or if you click the link to their site, pico.sh, and hit Getting Started, there's a lot more documentation there.
I think what you're actually doing (whether you realize it or not) is criticizing the person who submitted this project's choice to link the github repo instead of the main site, which is a valid criticism, but that isn't really a fault of the project IMO.
Yes, at least one sentence at the top. Linking to a website containing several "something.sh" titles leading to multiple pages with proper one-sentence descriptions is a silly treasure hunt.
I wasn't that interested, gave up after 2 pages and my take is still "they're re-using popular text editor's name, whatever this does".
It's sort of like expecting assembly instructions to be full of marketing copy about why you want to use the product and why it was made. Presumably, when you're looking at the instruction manual, you're already past that point. Just because someone did the equivalent of handing you an instruction manual does not mean that instruction manual has a major shortcoming by not explaining all the wonderful ways the product it builds can help you. You were given the wrong material without context.
Which is also subpar. It’s documentation, sure, but still fails to adequately explain what this is, who it is for, and why should anyone care.
Building a barebones platform for people who are largely self sufficient is cheap. Building a full fat platform for people who need more hand holding, is a bit more costly.
I won't tell you what it is though - I'm not here to hold your hand.