Remove outdated Docker description from Installation docs

[justinpickering]

Context:
See slack message regarding GH issue.

• Docker description in Installation and dependencies documentationis outdated due to unmaintained Docker builds. We recommend removing the Docker section entirely, and guiding users to Docker support in Lightning documentation.

Description of the Change:

• Remove outdated 'Docker' section in Installation and dependencies documentation

Benefits:

• Eliminates outdated information, helping prevent user confusion from unsupported Docker builds as noted in this GH issue.

Possible Drawbacks:

Related GitHub Issues:
#6452

[github-actions]

Hello. You may have forgotten to update the changelog!
Please edit doc/releases/changelog-dev.md with:

• A one-to-two sentence description of the change. You may include a small working example for new features.
• A link back to this PR.
• Your name (or GitHub username) in the contributors section.

[justinpickering]

[sc-76898]

[mlxd]

Thanks @justinpickering

No issue from me. Do we want the changes for the new README to go into master or the 0.39 release for the other PR?

Also, I think the linked related PR is the wrong index value.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Please upload report for BASE (v0.39.0-docs@7bbfebb). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##             v0.39.0-docs    #6487   +/-   ##
===============================================
  Coverage                ?   99.38%           
===============================================
  Files                   ?      452           
  Lines                   ?    42797           
  Branches                ?        0           
===============================================
  Hits                    ?    42535           
  Misses                  ?      262           
  Partials                ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[justinpickering]

Thanks @mlxd !

No issue from me. Do we want the changes for the new README to go into master or the 0.39 release for the other PR?

The README changes (PR) aren’t specific to the 0.39 release, so I think it can continue pointing to master unless there’s a particular reason to change it.

Also, I think the linked related PR is the wrong index value.

Fixed! Pointing to #6452 instead :)