Unify information with Erstiheft

[jeriox]

Apart from myHPI, we also publish the Erstiheft. Some information can be found in both sources, some only in one of them. Sometimes it is not clear where to search for information about a specific topic. In this context, we came up with the idea of unifying the information. A first idea was to share a single set of markdown content and use that to output both to myHPI and to the Erstiheft. This has some drawbacks, so it would need further discussion first.

[SilvanVerhoeven]

On that note, would it make sense to work on moving the Erstiheft content to myHPI entirely? It would solve that I have to access myHPI to access the Erstiheft PDF to search for the content I am actually looking for. Information could be unified in a ✨knowledge base✨.

A disadvantage compared to the current workflow: The FSR couldn't work on one version internally and publish at once. Content would (probably) be distributed across different pages. Might be an advantage tho: Content could be updated more easily in little batches and prepared/reviewed using the wagtail page drafts. Only discussing changes async would be cumbersome.

This wouldn't require any new features/technologies in myHPI.

Any thoughts from FSR members? @lukasrad02 @dasGoogle

[lukasrad02]

I understand the motivation of unifying the different information sources of the FSR. However, there are some crucial features without which I wouldn't consider discontinuing the Erstiheft PDF, such as proper diffs for the review (#565) or improving the search by adding filters, sorting etc.

Apart from that, I personally like that the Erstiheft is a separate booklet instead of a myHPI page with links to all relevant pages, because for me, the booklet style feels more like a collection of information that is dedicated to first semesters and is worth reading. On myHPI, it would be harder to separate information that is relevant for first semester students from other information pages, especially in the "unified knowledge base" model.