[chestm007]

Description

update alot of the docs that are outdated
Tracing, EwbDataPaths, Evolve->Ewb great refactor.

If you have added new dependencies to the project please state why.

Test Steps

Explain in detail how your reviewer can test the changes proposed in this PR. If it cannot be tested, leave an explanation on why.

Checklist

If any of these are not applicable, strikethrough the line ~like this~. Do not delete it!. Let the reviewer decide if you should have done it.

Code

• I have performed a self review of my own code (including checking issues raised when creating the PR).
• I have added/updated unit tests for these changes, and if not I have explained why they are not necessary.
• I have commented my code in any hard-to-understand or hacky areas.
• I have handled all new warnings generated by the compiler or IDE.
• I have rebased onto the target branch (usually main).

Security

When developing applications, use following guidelines for information security considerations:

• Access to applications should be protected with security keys/tokens or usernames and passwords;
• All sessions are encrypted if possible;
• All application input is sanitised before being acted on (ie SQL statements, etc);
• Log messages, and especially client-facing ones, must be handled securely and must not leak credentials information (internal URLs, passwords, tokens).

• I have considered if this change impacts information security and made sure those impacts are handled.

Documentation

- [ ] I have updated the changelog.

• I have updated any documentation required for these changes.

Breaking Changes

• I have considered if this is a breaking change and will communicate it with other team members by posting it on the Slack breaking-changes channel.

Please leave a summary of the breaking changes here and then post it on the Slack breaking-changes channel to notify the team about it.

[charlta]

I did a partial skim of the docs at best. I don't know if the changes are correct, nor am I fully aware of what was wrong, so without a lot of effort I can't fully confirm the accuracy of what is here. Is this something that @Boris-Filin would be better placed to do, given he has recently been all over the repo?

From a checking of content/rendering etc I have done nothing. This will be best served by someone that can build the docs locally and proof read things (perhaps @tarlintino or @AlexV-ZB?)

There are no meaningful changes to code, so worst case is the docs that are outdated or broken are in a different state of disrepair. Most likely is a heap of things were fixed and we have a much better outcome than what is there currently, so if no one else gets to this I will end up just merging it in a week or so.

[AlexV-ZB]

I can take a look when I get some quiet time :)
I can also build the docs locally to check formatting etc

[alourie]

Looks fine to me, not sure I can comment on docs correctness.

[AlexV-ZB]

There was one broken anchor (link), I fixed it. I have not reviewed the content of the docs.

[charlta]

There was one broken anchor (link), I fixed it. I have not reviewed the content of the docs.

@alourie This should have failed the PR actions I would have thought. Looking at the checks it is running in the green tick, it doesn't look like the docs were built? Just missed it