We all applaud the new Prodigy documentation as a smashing success and are grateful for the effort you expended on it. Like you, we are middleware providers. As a documentation strategy, we need (1) open source, (2) lowest total cost for authoring and sustainment, and (3) instantly familiar layout/navigation for developers (like Prodigy's). Prodigy/spaCy is already baked into our workflows, so we are aiming for a consistent look-and-feel throughout our documentation.
"Back-room" question (if I may): Is gatsby.js in fact your documentation environment? (8 occurrences of "gatsby" in the View Source tells me that it is.)
Thank you yet again.
Thanks for the kind words (I labelled this "off-topic" only because it's not specifically on the topic of using Prodigy itself, to make sure people don't get confused).
I use Gatsby for most of the static sites I build, because it solves a lot of high-level problems (speed, mixing dynamic and static content, pre-compiling a bunch of stuff). It also lets me implement custom components exactly how I want them. I've built all our sites pretty much from scratch, with fully custom components.
While Gatsby is pretty easy to set up for a basic site, it's still a specialised front-end framework. Building custom sites takes time and requires a developer who is familiar with a range of front-end technologies. I don't think it'd satisfy your "lowest total cost for authoring and sustainment".
A Read the Docs site with a customised theme might be a better fit if you want to get started. And it's also very familiar to developers, because many projects use it. I've also heard lots of good things about MkDocs and its Material Theme – all open-source and the layout follows a similar structure.