Document who should use ClusterFuzzLite and compare to other options

[jonathanmetzman]

This was suggested by @WorksButNotTested

[hickford]

It would be neat to have a table comparing ClusterFuzzLite and ClusterFuzz.

For example, is there any advantage adding ClusterFuzzLite if you are already using OSS-Fuzz?

[inferno-chromium]

@jonathanmetzman - We should update the docs on @hickford questions.

@hickford - If you are integrated with OSS-Fuzz and using CIFuzz [https://google.github.io/oss-fuzz/getting-started/continuous-integration/] in your CI/CD, then you don't need ClusterFuzzLite (CIFuzz and ClusterFuzzLite are same things). ClusterFuzzLite is for projects who can't use OSS-Fuzz, or have private repos.

[evverx]

If you are integrated with OSS-Fuzz and using CIFuzz [https://google.github.io/oss-fuzz/getting-started/continuous-integration/] in your CI/CD, then you don't need ClusterFuzzLite

FWIW I'm planning to replace CIFuzz with CFLite: google/oss-fuzz#7195 (comment) . In my experience CFLite is more stable and predictable.

[evverx]

I think it would be even more predictable if it was possible to pin it properly but considering that I already can pin the docker image used by CFLite to build the fuzzers I already can avoid issues caused by clang rolls.