docs: curate wiki back into the repo

[refack]

• Subsystem: docs,guides

A little bit similar to the concept in http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6941688/how-to-integrate-a-github-wiki-into-the-main-project
We clone the current wiki into a new repo (maybe nodejs/core-wiki) and migrate the non-API docs and guides there. This will allow us the regular issue/PR workflow that would end in "landing" changes into https://github.com/nodejs/node/wiki (which is a git repo https://github.com/nodejs/node.wiki.git that would become write restricted).

Also I feel it's very important to have a clear table-of-content with pointers as to whom should read what (maybe also copied into /README.md)

[refack]

spin off from #12436 (comment)

[gibfahn]

I'd be -1 on this for the reasons in #12436 . Basically I don't see what you gain, and it makes things more complicated. I'd rather move the stuff in the wiki to doc/guides/website.

Also I feel it's very important to have a clear table-of-content with pointers as to whom should read what (maybe also copied into /README.md)

I think this should just be the README, which is where I think most people start.

#6885 may be relevant.

[refack]

You've read my opinions in the #12436 thread. I'm mainly pro-README-as-ToC, and a little bit of tidying up.

I'm just asking you to give it second thought, whether it wouldn't be nicer, cleaner, and tidier to have the meta-documentation (and meta-meta discussion i.e. issues and PRs) in a separate space.

[refack]

If we don't get consensus on a new repo, I'm also suggesting a small reorganization of files, and adding a guides tag for easy separation.

[joyeecheung]

I think moving the wiki to somewhere managed by git would be better, no matter where it gets moved to.

As for the guides, I am not sure, because for me they also serve as documentations of the codebase (i.e. why certain lines of code are written in a certain way, why the commit history looks in a certain way, how to use the internal API to do stuff), I am more used to seeing this kind of stuff in the codebase (so they would show up when I am searching the codebase for an explanation...)

[sam-github]

If this was an actively used wiki with up-to-date content, I might agree, but as-is, I'm -1.

I think a more useful approach would to survey the content of the wiki, and determine a reasonable disposition:

• API Changes & Breaking changes: should in website repo so its on nodejs.org
• async exception handling: should be deleted, its wrong
• contributing: out of date, delete
• deprecation: out of date, delete

.... I don't have energy to go through this all, but so far, most of the stuff I've seen should be deleted or moved. I don't think there will be anything in it when this process is complete.

[refack]

I did a 180.
I'll follow @sam-github comment and make a PR.

[Trott]

Should this remain open?

[apapirovski]

This has been inactive for a year now. I'm going to close it out but feel free to reopen if you're intending to revisit this sometime soon or think this is well suited to the help wanted or good first issue labels.