This is an interesting question, but there are some layers we can unpack a bit before diving in. You seem to be somewhat familiar with the written corpus of combat treatises, which is a good start, but we should take a slightly deeper dive into the content of some of the more notable fechtbucher.

First, let's address what he written record is and isn't. It is a rather diverse collection of written and sometimes illustrated accounts of techniques for personal combat. It isn't comprehensive, complete, or without difficulties in interpretation (both in their physical respects as well as contextual content and cultural framing). Some treatises are extensive iterations of a practical system of personal combat, and some are simple collections of a wide array of techniques unconnected to a philosophical or systemic ideal to connect them. An example of the former would be something like Fiore d'ei Liberi's Flower of Battle, and the latter would be something like Paulus Hector Mair's unnamed treatise. Fiore explains a coherent martial philosophy applicable in nearly any situation by adherence to fundamental principles, whereas Mair collects and illustrates a large series of relatively unconnected but interesting techniques in a variety of weapons.

If we take a look at Fiore, and the far more complicated contemporary German martial lineage of Johannes Liechtenaur, we can see that there is far more to them than just "fencing" by which I think you mean "fighting with swords" (but please correct me if I'm wrong. Fiore teaches grappling, baton, dagger and dagger against sword, sword in one hand, sword in two hands, sword vs spear, sword in armor, axes in armor, spear, spear against other weapons, and fighting on horseback. The Liechtenauer lineage teaches, at its core, "long" sword (sword held with both hands on the grip), "short" sword (sword held in two hands, with one on the blade - what is commonly called "halfswording"), and mounted fencing. Other masters that follow him also include wrestling, dagger, polearms of various kinds, "dueling shield," messer, and a variety of other weapons.

It's important to make the distinction between "fencing" and a "system of personal combat." Most of the fechtbucher fall into the latter category. Even going into the 16th century when the longsword was overtaken in popularity and daily use by rapiers, systemic treatises taught the use of the longsword as, more or less, a starting point to teach principles of attack and defense, later taking those and applying them to weapons that were more useful to those being taught. 16th century masters, for instance, very commonly included in their corpus the halberd, and sometimes the pike, as well.

All that said, there are some treatises that deal more exclusively with weapons other than swords, but they're very rare. Le Jeu de la Hache is probably the only one still extent, at least in Europe. It's an unillustrated French treatise specifically about combat with the pollaxe.

In general and as a sort of conclusion, most of the martial lineages that we have records of taught systems of personal combat that were suited to a specific place, time, and social class. Studying any of them will teach a student how to function in combat given almost any kind of weapon at all, simply by applying the pragmatic principles taught by the system. Less cohesive sources will teach a variety of neat tricks that can be done with different weapons but express no systemic or interdependent philosophy behind it. Nearly every source that is reasonably comprehensive with respect to weapons in use in its time will teach some manner of pole-mounted weapon.