Improvement: Consolidate ArDrive CLI/Turbo SDK Upload methods

[longviewoor]

At the moment we have a few different guides and tutorials containing ways to upload data to Arweave using ArDrive.

Some of these use the ArDrive CLI, and some use the ArDrive Turbo SDK. Both are viable but it might make more sense to offer a single option on this front to avoid confusion.

Do you have any thoughts here @atticusofsparta?

[atticusofsparta]

In general im in favor of identifying workflows people want to execute and then under those as options, show the products that can be used.

At the moment the only one i actually see in the docs is for arweave manifests (called path manifests for some reason which is i guess a more descriptive term)

What I would recommend here to stick with that concept is workflow > brand or group of products > products

This allows novice users to more easily navigate and decide which they want to use. Ideally theres examples in there.

CLI is technically "no code" but also a more technically inclined workflow, and requires an install.

So for this i would recommend something like Store encrypted data > ardrive > ardrive.app | ardrive CLI

This is also perhaps a good candidate example for tagging the workflows for the "choose your path" algo that @dpshade was looking at. Each document can be tagged with things like "encryption" or "no code" and so on to recommend things to the viewer.... but i digress.

As for which to use, ardrive.app vs ardrive cli vs turbo sdk...

ardrive.app and ardrive cli are both no-code and turbo sdk is code option, and actually theres also a difference of ardrive, and turbo. Ardrive is built on ArFS, turbo is just an upload SDK for ans-104.

They should be seperated out into their respective domains.

Above I expounded on routing for a no-code workflow example for uploading, for turbo sdk there would be a code workflow, something like Upload to arweave > Turbo > turbo sdk | api (api being a direct example without the turbo sdk)`

The index pages for the brand / product sections would explain the pros/cons of using them (for example the free 100kb limit, arbundles supported signer availabiliy, etc)