@MSoegtrop I agree with your remarks, to sum up:
(a) adding WSL instructions in the official wiki might lead to additional maintenance work (so if one decides to add such instructions there, some volunteer, ideally a regular user of Windows − which is not my case − should be in charge of testing/maintaining that script/instructions)
(b) for students willing to use Coq on Windows, the easiness of the installation is very important (which is indeed much easier with the Coq Windows Installer, than with WSL!)
Still, there are two use cases that not intended to be addressed by the Coq Windows Installer IINM:
(1) Provide a full OPAM installation to ease the installation of additional coq-released packages on-the-fly;
(2) Make it possible to install Merlin to use Emacs with Tuareg+ProofGeneral under Windows.
To this aim, there is the Cygwin-based solution https://fdopen.github.io/opam-repository-mingw/installation/ that allows one to install a full OPAM setup for Windows: we had tested it two years ago but the installation procedure, albeit simpler, seemed a bit tricky because it was less robust than WSL (several students had problems with the syntax of their Windows username… others just told us that they weren’t able to install it)
(3) Also, even if the installation instructions of a teaching unit says “Please use Cygwin”, we realized there are sometimes students that already have WSL installed on their laptop and really prefer to use it rather than Cygwin, thinking that “WSL should be easier and more convenient”
So last year, our choice of the WSL approach (which is definitely lighter than installing Coq under Linux in a VM) was motivated by these three points (1)(2)(3).
But WSL itself is not a requirement for us: if one can address (1) and (2) in a simple and robust way, we’ll be interested as well!
E.g., we didn’t test the installation of Chocolatey, mentioned in the wiki: can this address (1) and (2)?
By the way I am unsure if as you say, “it might be worse [to have it documented but not maintained] than not having it because it might lead people into needless frustration”, because as suggested in item (3) above, omitting such instructions in the official wiki could maybe add frustration for users that really want to rely on WSL…
Maybe if we are afraid that at some point the instructions are not fully up-to-date, some disclaimer could just be added there to say so and/or redirect power users to the simplest installation method?
I personally started to work on replacing the Windows build system with using dune and opam, so that it is more attractive for power users and makes it easier e.g. to build customized installers for courses (e.g. for the HoTT summer school I had to create a special installer including HoTT).
out of curiosity, would this kind of customized installer target items (1) and (2) above, or the opam switch is only involved during the preparation of the customized installer, and not kept in the final installation?