Merge OTEPs into the Specification.

[carlosalberto]

Latest attempt to merge the OTEPs repo into the Specification:

• OTEPs will live under the oteps directory, next to specification one.
• History has been kept.
• Updated @codeboten email from his previous defunct value (preventing CLA check).

Additionally, additional lint fixes in order to merge this:

• Removed dead links, e.g. links to now removed Lightstep documentation.
• Updated links that point to the Specification (our current lint prefers local, rather than absolute addresses).
• Updated links for components that have been moved around, e.g. semantic conventions and the protocol.

Follow-ups:

• Clarification on the README & each OTEP that these are proposal of intent, not actual specification instructions.
• Normative language usage clarification.
• How to assign OTEP numbers (we cannot rely on PR number, as we did in the OTEPs repository).
• Move issues from the OTEPs repository (to either the Specification or semantic conventions).
• Archive the OTEPs repository (it should still be reachable, for historical purposes).

[reyang]

:shipit:

[tigrannajaryan]

How to assign OTEP numbers (we cannot rely on PR number, as we did in the OTEPs repository).

Why not? Because the numbers are too big? 4 digits seems ok to me and we are likely going to end up with a maximum of 5 digits in the lifetime of this repo which is perhaps a bit much but still not terrible.

[carlosalberto]

Why not? Because the numbers are too big? 4 digits seems ok to me and we are likely going to end up with a maximum of 5 digits in the lifetime of this repo which is perhaps a bit much but still not terrible.

I wouldn't be completely opposed to it, as long as we accept the trade-off ;)

[carlosalberto]

Merging today to avoid any conflict/issue. Will follow up with pending tasks as part of #4284