docs: port the platform integration guides from Discourse

[medubelko]

• Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
• Have you signed the CLA?
• Have you successfully run tox run -m lint?
• Have you successfully run tox run -e test-py310? (supported versions: py39, py310, py311, py312)

---

CRAFT-3577

[medubelko]

@mr-cal I wanted to give you a preview of the shape, look, and feel of these pages. I aim to have this ready for a full review by end of pulse. If you have high-level concerns, please let me know.

A few things to note:

• The longest file in the stack contains all the unused text and should be ignored. The smaller temp files contain text for the remaining pages.
• Take note that I consider these to flawed how-tos. As we move files away from Discourse, there will be staging fragments of pages that don't have the right home in the quadrants yet. As we adopt more pages and the population starts to be properly partitioned, I'll be correcting these issues and shifting the offending text around.
• The code isn't in separate files yet, but this won't matter much because the recipes won't be running on spread.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.71%. Comparing base (654871d) to head (ba374e4).
Report is 647 commits behind head on main.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (654871d) and HEAD (ba374e4). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (654871d)	HEAD (ba374e4)
	2	1

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5160      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.88%   89.71%   -5.17%     
==========================================
  Files         658      342     -316     
  Lines       55189    22638   -32551     
==========================================
- Hits        52364    20309   -32055     
+ Misses       2825     2329     -496     

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

[medubelko]

@mr-cal I need to separate the example files, but otherwise this should be ready to review.

[mr-cal]

Nice work, from a high level the structure and design is great.

[mr-cal]

I noticed some plugin reference documentation links point to snapcraft.io and others point to RTD. Is that intentional?

This is what I am ignoring in this review:

• Some guides use core18 which is technically still supported in snapcraft 7 but newer examples would be preferred. For example, the Rust guide uses core18.
• I am assuming the examples work as they aren't tested and I didn't test them.

[medubelko]

@mr-cal

I noticed some plugin reference documentation links point to snapcraft.io and others point to RTD. Is that intentional?

Correct. There's no way around this problem at the moment. It's an ugliness we'll have to live with while the migration is in progress.

[medubelko]

Merging this will unblock canonical/open-documentation-academy#9.

[lengau]

The spelling of wethr needs fixing, but the other suggestions can wait until later.