[Development] Changes to Freenode's IRC

[Jason H]

For mode detail about the situation, I consulted:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7ev8y/freenode-open-source-korea-crown-prince-takeover
https://www.kline.sh/

In the past my use of IRC was limited by firewalls. If at all possible,
whatever is moved to, I would request be web-accessable (https).
Freenode has the web-chat client, which when I  was limited by firewalls,
was really appreciated. (Wifi guest networks are bad about this in
particular)

> Lacking some formal voting infrastructure, how do we take this vote?
> I'd say, KISS: please reply to this email and express your preference.

So I thought there was some kind of voting infrastructure (VI) already?
I thought this is what Open Governance would hinge on. I was under the
impression that there would be some kind of VI, and that would be used
to shape the direction of Qt. Anyhow, my mistakes aside, I thought Gerrit
was the tool, where our accounts could vote on a patch set (ballot) that
would record the vote. Also it would help to formally specify what the
ballot questions are.

----- Ballot -- vvv

* Is the Qt community OK at staying on Freenode? (Currently it has an
*official* presence! Although noone seems to know better, esp. who is
the primary contact for this presence. Looking at the channels
registrations, the founders are Thiago, ossi, tronical, JP-Nurmi, but
that doesn't necessarily match who is the point of contact.)

Vote: Is is not Ok.

* If no: does it wish to move to another IRC network -- to where?

Vote: Libera or KDE. It is too soon to decide because Libera.chat is down.
If KDE is willing to take the burden, I would be ok with that.

* If no: does it want to drop its official IRC presence? Implication:
the #qt* channels namespace will be released, and so up for grabs by the
first person passing by and registering channels in there.

Vote: Keep the channels, just to forward to the new resource. ("Qt has moved...")

----- Ballot -- ^^^