Port Maestro documentation to mkdocs

[FrankD412]

This is a running PR to port over documentation to mkdocs and the Material theme.

[jwhite242]

Just adding the link here for the live preview of this PR while we build this up: https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/

[jwhite242]

Alright, WIP status removed, time for reviewing this beast

[doutriaux1]

Front page: reproducability -> reproducibility

Getting Started:

• should we add pip install maestrowf or at least a link to install instructions?
• I would put a couple of line to describe what the study the user is copy/pasting is about (before saying copy/paste this)

Why Maestro:

• I would put something similar at the top I'm not sure the general description before getting started is enough.
• Why Meastro was created: [stub] -> needs content

Maestro page:

• None. Set up in 5 minutes. (What is the none about?)

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Philosophy/representation.html

• graph TD; A(Setup inputs)-->B(Simulate); B-->C(Post Process); -> That seems like an actual graph is intended here

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Philosophy/principles.html

• At the end it is not clear when clicking on "next" that we move to the "User's Guide". Adding a sentence at the end of each section about what's coming up next would be great.

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/index.html

• "what is maestro": I would duplicate this or put something similar at the top of "home"
• put a link to this section in the "quick start" in "home"
• I would just put the "say-hello" in the home quick start, I feel the current is too complex and daunting for people coming in.

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/tutorials.html

• "These options will be covered later in these tutorials and the how-to sections ." The space after sections leads to a new line with a single dot on it. It's a bit odd.
• "Two parameters are added, each with multiple values: NAME and GREETING. " I would go with: "Two parameters are added: NAME and GREETING, each with multiple values."

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/specification.html

• Parameter token section: "The big different with" -> "The big difference with"
• "labels" the example: env: labels: outfile: $(SIZE.label).$(ITERATIONS.label).log where to SIZE and ITERATION come from? The env/variable section, the global.parameters section? Maybe we need to expand the example here even though SIZe and ITERATION are indeed defined and expalined later.
• dependencies: can the git tag be a commit's SHA? *batch block: is host really required? I thought it was ignored
• batch: add an example for lsf? there are only slurm and flux.

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/scheduling.html

• LOCAL section as [stub] only.

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/parameter_specification.html

• first 2 "warn" are not completed
• ":ref:pgen_section is recommended." looks like :ref: is left over non parsed code
• same in "pgen arguments" section a few :ref: there
• "Referencing Values from a Specification's Env Block" lots of paraguayflags? I'm not sure they're intended.
• class and func in the same function seem to be badly expanded as well.

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/how_to_guides/timeouts.html

• is --rlimit=3 the only way to control the number of restarts? Should it be in the step specs?

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/how_to_guides/parameter_batches.html

• in next steps section point to maestro musicsheets?

https://maestrowf--403.org.readthedocs.build/en/403/Maestro/reference_guide/design_reference/index.html

• seems empty

• API: I didn't look at it.

[jwhite242]

Alright, first pass at addressing review comments (thanks @doutriaux1 !). And one followup there to the question on host in the batch block that's not really addressed in the docs: while it is ignored by the scheduler in come cases, maestro's script adapters currently expect it to be there and will fail on a key error when trying to pop it off. It looks like there's no schema validation on these yet, so might be an opportunity for improvement there in a follow on pr to get early failures and better warning messages for the users.