Moved images & updated legacy links

[cwarnermm]

• Gitbook images moved to /assets directory.
• /docs folder removed since GitBook pages are no longer being sync'd to GitHub.
• updated links on the page to pages/images

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (de8de08) 23.51% compared to head (c245a68) 23.51%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #301 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 23.51% 23.51% ======================================= Files 9 9 Lines 1212 1212 ======================================= Hits 285 285 Misses 874 874 Partials 53 53 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[cwarnermm]

That's a good question, @hanzei. Do all of the plugins work similarly? CC @mickmister

[hanzei]

Yes, all plugins use the assets folder for bundle related files.

[cwarnermm]

Thanks, @hanzei. Since all plugins operate the same way, and the docs migration work applies the same migration changes across each plugin repo, I feel we're offering a consistent experience across the community supported plugins. Any concerns about proceeding with this PR from your perspective?

[mickmister]

@cwarnermm The assets folder is reserved for application-related files that the plugin's server component can access at runtime. I would prefer using a separate folder like docs, to house these doc-related images, even if that folder is no longer associated with GitBooks.

[cwarnermm]

Thanks for clarifying, @mickmister. I'm open to moving the docs image files that came via GitBooks.

However, what I'm not clear on is whether I need to revisit all of the community supported plugin repos again and move the image files that were moved to the /assets directory. Please advise.

[mickmister]

However, what I'm not clear on is whether I need to revisit all of the community supported plugin repos again and move the image files that were moved to the /assets directory. Please advise.

It technically doesn't cause any functional issues, so it if it's a lot of rework I would say it's not necessary. Having the assets folder be only what the plugin uses just gives us a way to quickly see its dependencies on some static files, and may cause confusion if there are files there not imported by the plugin. If the PRs are still open and it seems like a trivial change, then I think why not, but not a requirement.

[cwarnermm]

The request to keep the /assets directory clean makes a lot of sense, and I'm happy to take that approach with this PR and the remaining open PRs.

For all of the GitHub plugin repos that have already been approved and merged, we'll create Help Wanted tickets for remaining work.

[cwarnermm]

@hanzei - Let's merge this PR as-is. It's the last one to be merged as part of the v9.0 release. I'll create a help wanted ticket for Hacktoberfest to get the doc image assets moved out of the /assets directory.

[hanzei]

/check-cla

[hanzei]

/update-branch

[hanzei]

@toninis Can you please check why Mattermod status doesn't get updated?

[toninis]

@toninis Can you please check why Mattermod status doesn't get updated?

Should be ok 👌🏼