[llvm] [docs] Point to Discourse for creating RFCs (PR #114341)

[Jan Svoboda via llvm-commits]

https://github.com/jansvoboda11 created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114341

The mailing lists mentioned in `CodeReview.rst` no longer exist. Point to Discourse as the place to discuss RFCs instead.

>From 871c8ed79dd5127bdc887f1631d4ef46a7d05b59 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Svoboda <jan at svoboda.ai>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:20:21 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [docs] Point to Discourse for creating RFCs

---
 llvm/docs/CodeReview.rst | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/llvm/docs/CodeReview.rst b/llvm/docs/CodeReview.rst
index 56798ae4faf0c4..731786c8bc4882 100644
--- a/llvm/docs/CodeReview.rst
+++ b/llvm/docs/CodeReview.rst
@@ -89,10 +89,10 @@ When Is an RFC Required?
 Some changes are too significant for just a code review. Changes that should
 change the LLVM Language Reference (e.g., adding new target-independent
 intrinsics), adding language extensions in Clang, and so on, require an RFC
-(Request for Comment) email on the project's ``*-dev`` mailing list first. For
-changes that promise significant impact on users and/or downstream code bases,
-reviewers can request an RFC achieving consensus before proceeding with code
-review. That having been said, posting initial patches can help with
+(Request for Comment) topic on the `LLVM Discussion Forums <https://discourse.llvm.org>`_
+first. For changes that promise significant impact on users and/or downstream
+code bases, reviewers can request an RFC achieving consensus before proceeding
+with code review. That having been said, posting initial patches can help with
 discussions on an RFC.
 
 Code-Review Workflow