Publish IPIPs to specs.ipfs.tech

[hacdias]

Based on #394.

A preview of what moving the IPIPs can look like. Nice things to get:

• Rebase and update once feat: use frontmatter title and description, automatic lists #408 is merged.
• Merge Improvements to the specifications website #394
• "Related Issues" on the frontmatter, such that it is displayed in a similar way to the editors (depends on feat: support for relatedIssues frontmatter field spec-generator#6)
• Separate styling, maybe a different accent colour: yellow? orange? We should use something we already have.
• Add IPIPs link in the main index.
• Update the IPIP process to include right paths.
• Decide on URL structure (done in Publish IPIPs to specs.ipfs.tech #385 (comment))
• Simplified listings by using a common include with the list. This way they don't get out of sync (thanks @darobin)

[darobin]

These are mostly questions and general comments, nothing on the critical path.

[hacdias]

I marked it as ready for review as I think most things are "ready". We just have to merge ipfs/spec-generator#6 and settle on how we want to style the IPIPs.

[hacdias]

This is how IPIPs look now. Just have to add a maturity: proposal:

[lidel]

@hacdias @darobin do either of you needs this to land this week before Governance track and related talks?
If so, lmk, I can merge and we can fix things later.
If not critical, i am ok with keeping this open, and getting back to it after we are done with IPFS Thing.

[hacdias]

@lidel not critical for our presentation, so we can push it back for next week.

[darobin]

Couldn't this use background-image on body? It would be less hacky.

[darobin]

It would be nice to do the watermark differently, but I would rather ship now and fix later than hold up just for that.

[hacdias]

@darobin i don't like the way I did the watermakrs either. Suggestions?

[lidel]

lgtm, we can fix cosmethics in follow-up.

Merging to unblock IPIP work in #402 using the new template