Update docs on placement of non-foundational services

Cf. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zati5ZohwjUM0vz5qj6sWg5r-_I0iisUoSoAMNdd7C8/edit#heading=h.xo57d5v7zhrp.

This CL just updates docs. Movement of existing services in //components
will follow.

Change-Id: I9fceb075f66eadfd9e2ceb6ae55d927affbdf8a0
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/948851Reviewed-by: John Abd-El-Malek <jam@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: Colin Blundell <blundell@chromium.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#541759}

docs/servicification.md

@@ -73,11 +73,8 @@ question hinges on the nature and location of the code that you are converting:
 - If you are looking to convert all or part of a component (i.e., a feature in
   //components) into a service, the question arises of whether your new service
   is worthy of being in //services (i.e., is it a foundational service?). If
-  not, then it can be placed in an appropriate subdirectory of the component
-  itself. See this [email
-  thread](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/services-dev/3AJx3gjHbZE) and its [resulting CL](https://codereview.chromium.org/2832633002)
-  for discussion of this point, and if in doubt, start a similar email thread
-  discussing your feature.
+  not, then it can be placed in //components/services. See this
+  [document](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zati5ZohwjUM0vz5qj6sWg5r-_I0iisUoSoAMNdd7C8/edit#) for discussion of this point.
 
 ### If your service is embedded in the browser process, what is its threading model?
 

ipc/README.md

@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ In the limit, this is the preferred destination for any message conversions
 pertaining to foundational system services (more info at
 [https://www.chromium.org/servicification](https://www.chromium.org/servicification).)
 For other code it may make sense to introduce services elsewhere (*e.g.*, in
-`//chrome/services` or `//components/foo/service`), or to simply
+`//chrome/services` or `//components/services`), or to simply
 avoid using services altogether for now and instead define some one-off Mojom
 interface alongside the old messages file.