Separate current templates from generator repository

[derberg]

Reason:

Generator repo should only consist of the "core" of the generator and once we have 'remote-templates' support, templates should be developed and released separately. This will make onboarding and development aka contributions easier

Description:

• move templates to a separate repo. One with monorepo setup with lerna or other tool that will simplify development, or as many as we have templates, but then introduce some naming convention.
• think about pros and cons of monorepo vs separate. For sure with monorepo we won't be able to use GitHub releases, and tagging will be strange because if here Introduce remote-templates support #235 we go with NPM and sem-ver, then proper versioning will be important for a project

Hints:

• Except for Introduce remote-templates support #235 that blocks this issue, it would be also nice to have this Avoid code repetition in templates filters #212 done first, before we move templates to separate repositories (if we do not do monorepo)
• Conventional commits support monorepos by allowing to have a scope indication on the commit message, like feat(markdown): add some new thing to markdown template so CI can properly identify that the version bump should be done only for markdown template

[RobertDiebels]

Might I propose creating an @asyncapi scope on npm.

• Will aid users when searching for AsyncAPI related packages.
• Will clarify which packages with asyncapi in their name are maintained by AsyncAPI collaborators.
• May be useful in the future if there are going to be more separate templates maintained by AsyncAPI collaborators.

I'm not sure whether this should be a stand-alone issue or part of this one. Just thought I would mention it.

Side-note: Not withstanding the issues you mentioned of a monorepo. I'm a big fan of separate repositories. If only for the reduction in cognitive load when only dealing with with a small amount of folders and files.

[derberg]

@RobertDiebels we have it already https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=%40asyncapi and templates are already published with the scope. Other packages? should to. I'm now working on release automation for generator #225 , and then parser and I will make sure we publish with @asyncapi scope

[RobertDiebels]

@derberg Ah nice! Before I commented I only checked the main packages generator, parser, etc. I was not aware that we already had separate packages for the templates 👍 . You can disregard my comment in that case.

[fmvilas]

This was fixed by #261