[Question] Samples CI checks and redundancy

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Generic questions

• Edited because of sample validation changes: Samples in samples.mjs are checked for lint, hence in #1579 "Getting Started" sample had to be updated for PR to go in. Should we have similar sort of gatekeeping for the samples not in samples.mjs list? Then we can just rid of duplicate check?

• It might be worth publishing language samples to the same/separate website, if possible, for greater discovery.

• If option 2 isnt feasible, can we move samples not in samples.mjs list to a new repo? I liked classic QDK samples because they were in a separate repo. @tcNickolas has told me previously that monolith helps to simplify the dependencies. I highly doubt that somebody would likely visit this massive codebase to see these curated samples. Currently, they serve little purpose for both for Q# compiler team and people onboarding to Q#. Maybe add new samples repo as a submodule here if folks think it might be useful, although I know git submodules are a bit annoying.

Specific questions

• : Is QuantumHelloWorld.qs sample needed when we have Getting started(aka minimal) and superposition sample? Also, this is not in samples.mjs list. Interestingly, it does pop up on samples website which seems to have been updates a long time back.

• Is RandomBit.qs sample needed when code is very similar to superposition sample? Currently, this is in samples list and might be okay to have this duplicate to reiterate that random number can be generated using superposition.

[sezna]

This should be resolved when #1797 goes in

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Created separate issues for better triaging since #1797 addresssed a part of this issue and I am unable to reopen this issue