[REMOVED] IRC references on Readme.

[apurv-1]

Issues

fixes #4880

Description

The readme file had older irc.freenode.net, without any link.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

By opening https://webchat.freenode.net/ on the browser.

[GabrielBrascher]

Good catch, thanks for the PR @apurv-1. However, I am not sure if we should keep IRC, as far as I know, there is no one hanging out there.

In 2019 there was a discussion on ML about dropping IRC and therefore removing all IRC information on the website and documentations. I will double-check this.

@DaanHoogland @PaulAngus @andrijapanicsb @svenvogel @kiwiflyer and others: was there a vote regarding dropping IRC or did we get into a discussion but never raised a vote?

[PaulAngus]

The discussion was here @GabrielBrascher - https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/296def97c549e0b75bc14d0382ae412245cef6088e576acbcb007cc8%40%3Cdev.cloudstack.apache.org%3E
I think my view remains the same - only promote the mailing lists and if people want to have a synchronous call/chat, they can use whatever platform they like at the time. That may be the Slack channel, whereas the UI SIG used an adhoc Google Meet.

If a subject such as this can be resolved through community discussion, there is no need for a formal vote.

(For the record, irc.freenode.net is the URI for an IRC client, webchat.freenode.net is a client, which may or may not stay around)

[andrijapanicsb]

+1 on what Paul said.

Remove all IRC info. as it's (at best) misleading, and mention Slack channel together with a way on how to requests joining it (@kiwiflyer had some fancy Google Form sheet or something), but still emphasise " it's ML or nothing"

[GabrielBrascher]

@PaulAngus @andrijapanicsb thanks for answering. In order to track such a process, I created issue #4880.

@apurv-1 as you brought this up, could you please change the PR scope from updating the IRC reference to removing IRC references at the README?

[apurv-1]

Done @GabrielBrascher

[GabrielBrascher]

Ping for review: @PaulAngus @andrijapanicsb @DaanHoogland @rhtyd @svenvogel @wido @kiwiflyer @ustcweizhou @weizhouapache and others.

[DaanHoogland]

come to think about it, this should go on as old a branch as possible, should it?
cc @GabrielBrascher @rhtyd @andrijapanicsb @PaulAngus

[GabrielBrascher]

Good question, @DaanHoogland.

IMHO I don't see much problem with keeping it on master; I think that users tend to check the README at the master.