[Documentation] Cleanup Docs and Workflows

[h5law]

Summary

Human Summary

This PR moves all documentation to the docs/ subdir and updates the workflow files. It also makes codecov informational only instead of passing/failing CI checks.

AI Summary

Summary generated by Reviewpad on 03 Jan 24 14:06 UTC

This pull request includes the following changes:

1. Ignoring specific files and directories: The ".DS_Store" file, which are Mac OS X system files, and the ".idea/" directory, which contains Goland and JetBrains IDE files, are now being ignored. Additionally, a new file called ".tool-versions" is also being ignored, which is a local tool-versions file for asdf.

2. Changes to the .github/codecov.yml file: This file has been added with a mode of 100644. The coverage section has been added with the status configuration. The informational property has been set to true for both the project and patch sections.

3. Renaming and content changes for the SMT.md file: The file has been renamed to smt.md and includes an added section on "Closest Proof Use Cases." The "Compression" and "Data Loss" sections have been updated. An additional change is the renaming of documentation links for "KVStore" and "MerkleSumTrie" to lowercase.

4. Changes to the docs/KVStore.md file: This file has undergone a 90% similarity index change and has been renamed to kvstore.md. The changes involve reformatting the indentation of subheadings under the "Implementation" and "Accessor Methods" sections.

5. Changes to the MerkleSumTrie.md file: The filename has been changed to merkle-sum-trie.md. There have been changes in the headings and subheadings, including indentation adjustments. A file link for the SMT documentation has also been updated.

6. Updates to the test.yml file: The workflow name has been changed, the value of an environment variable has been updated, and various modifications have been made to different steps.

Please review these changes and ensure that they align with the intended modifications.

Issue

N/A

Type of change

Please mark the relevant option(s):

• New feature, functionality or library
• Bug fix
• Code health or cleanup
• Documentation
• Other (specify)

Testing

• Run all unit tests: make test_all
• Run all/relevant benchmarks (if optimising): make benchmark_{all | suite name}

Required Checklist

• I have tested my changes using the available tooling
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code (godoc format comments see: tip.golang.org/doc/comment)

If Applicable Checklist

• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have updated any relevant README(s)/documentation and left TODOs throughout the codebase
• Add or update any relevant or supporting mermaid diagrams

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (db06038) 83.28% compared to head (179f616) 83.28%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #34   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   83.28%   83.28%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines        1406     1406           
=======================================
  Hits         1171     1171           
  Misses        178      178           
  Partials       57       57           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Olshansk]

Do you think we need this at all given that we're not really acting on the feedback?

[h5law]

I like the coverage percentages, shows the lib has good test coverage

[h5law]

I use the feedback when I add new features

[Olshansk]

I like the coverage percentages, shows the lib has good test coverage

👍

I use the feedback when I add new features

When you put together a contribution guide for this repo, make sure this is clear.

As a n00b, I'd probably think this tool I've never seen or used is giving me a ⚠️. Do I ignore it or keep going?