Restructure docs

[RosalynLP]

This is the plan @voisey and I made today for restructuring the docs. PR #1122.

Plan for layout - tick when summary done

• Installation @voisey
• Overall summary explaining common things to want to do and linking tutorials - to do last @voisey @RosalynLP
• n3fit (done)
• validphys @RosalynLP
• data (Nathan part) @voisey
• theory @voisey
• CI @RosalynLP
• server stuff @voisey
• external @RosalynLP
• tutorials @RosalynLP

General

• Summary for each section - see layout plan for summary
• Move code before theory @RosalynLP
• validphys guide - restructure/ review? @RosalynLP
• Link CI in getting started (check if it is) @RosalynLP
• Remove Q&A section (empty) @voisey

Getting started

• Rename NNPDF code and standards documentation -> Documentation
• Get rid of documentation from code development resources @voisey
• Move Documentation chapter
• Sort out rendering of documentation page (see how CI pages are done) @RosalynLP
• Delete collinear fact and DGLAP @voisey
• merge installing code sections into one section @voisey
• make it clear when to use each installation method @voisey
• merge rules and PR reviewing @RosalynLP
• tools ... apples -> external tools & put it under code

Tutorials

• subheadings grouping tutorials
• label 4.0 style, 3.1 style ? @RosalynLP

[voisey]

@RosalynLP Having read the relevant section I've decided to keep the section in "Get rid of documentation from code development resources" so I've ticked it off. If you have strong opinions contrary to this let me know!

[voisey]

I wonder whether we want to merge the data/theory storage section with the theory section, so perhaps we should have a look at doing that later on

[voisey]

May I suggest we change "Documentation contents" simply to "Contents"?

[voisey]

Also, I would change "Code for data: validphys" to "Analysis code: validphys" or something similar, otherwise it could be confused with experimental data

[RosalynLP]

Also, I would change "Code for data: validphys" to "Analysis code: validphys" or something similar, otherwise it could be confused with experimental data

yes that's a good idea, I was struggling to think of a title so I thought we could always change it later but just having "validphys" and "buildmaster" etc. as headings is very confusing for a new user so thought we needed to clarify. I was deliberating before but the reason I didn't go with "analysis" code is because vp also does other stuff, e.g. server access, setupfit and things, but maybe overall it's better to call it analysis code as you say

[RosalynLP]

omg are we done? As far as overall summary is concerned I did a mini one with 3 bullet points but thought we could add more if needed... also we're going to have the code summary from mikey come in at some point which should help explain the structure. Do you think we need much else in the overall summary @voisey?

[voisey]

Yes, I see the problem with my suggestion for validphys...

I think the overall summary looks good for the moment, thanks! I think with this PR we should be aiming to get the overall structure in place and then we can tweak/add things in future with other PRs, so I think the current state of it is more than enough. What do you think?