CARML - AVM module transition complete

[matebarabas]

Description

This PR leaves clear indications that the CARML to AVM module transition is complete and that only the AVM version of the modules will be maintained going forward.

Type of Change

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Update to documentation

Checklist

• I'm sure there are no other open Pull Requests for the same update/change
• My corresponding pipelines / checks run clean and green without any errors or warnings
• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (readme)
• I did format my code

[AlexanderSehr]

The PR looks good, but given it's impact, I want to have a chance to talk with @eriqua first before merging it.
@eriqua, the main file to review is pretty much only the readme.md in root,

as all other changes are removals, updates to the moved-to-avm.md file

and updates to each module's readme.md file, which unfortuantely saw a lot more updates than it should as @matebarabas seems to have a markdown VSCode extension with table formatting enabled

Not that it matters much at this point. He shall just not do it in AVM 😄

[eriqua]

The PR looks good, but given it's impact, I want to have a chance to talk with @eriqua first before merging it. @eriqua, the main file to review is pretty much only the readme.md in root,

as all other changes are removals, updates to the moved-to-avm.md file

and updates to each module's readme.md file, which unfortuantely saw a lot more updates than it should as @matebarabas seems to have a markdown VSCode extension with table formatting enabled

Not that it matters much at this point. He shall just not do it in AVM 😄

@matebarabas @AlexanderSehr I believe that before removing all modules we should deal with open PRs and make sure that relevant improvements are ported to AVM.
Not sure how PR diffs will render after removing their target code.
I don't see many opened so it will hopefully be quick

[eriqua]

What is the purpose of keeping the readmes here? I'd suggest to remove them as well.

Some of them will have broken links due to the removal of their child module readmes, as pointed out also by the broken links PR check.

[AlexanderSehr]

cc: @matebarabas

[eriqua]

Discussed offline and agreed on removing readmes

[AlexanderSehr]

The PR looks good, but given it's impact, I want to have a chance to talk with @eriqua first before merging it. @eriqua, the main file to review is pretty much only the readme.md in root,
as all other changes are removals, updates to the moved-to-avm.md file
and updates to each module's readme.md file, which unfortuantely saw a lot more updates than it should as @matebarabas seems to have a markdown VSCode extension with table formatting enabled
Not that it matters much at this point. He shall just not do it in AVM 😄

@matebarabas @AlexanderSehr I believe that before removing all modules we should deal with open PRs and make sure that relevant improvements are ported to AVM. Not sure how PR diffs will render after removing their target code. I don't see many opened so it will hopefully be quick

I presume they'll simply show conflicts all over as they cannot update a file that doesn't exist