Inclusion of driver software in qcodes?

Recently I had some discussions about whether qcodes should also contain driver software required by some of the instruments to function. The motivation behind this is the new IVVI to PC communication boxes which require an FTDI driver to communicate over USB via a virtual COM port. It turns out that the driver downloaded from the official website has a default setting which significantly slows down reading data from the device. It made sense to include modified drivers where this setting is minimized so that other people don't run into the same problem.

This would provide a verified source of drivers (and correct versions) of which the functioning is known. I think it makes sense to include these kind of things in some `drivers` folder , perhaps alongside the `instrument_drivers` folder.

@giulioungaretti @alexcjohnson

Start by reviewing the proposed drivers folder alongside instrument_drivers and the IVVI/FTDI context. Determine whether modified driver software belongs in Qcodes and what verified source and version would be supported; done means a documented decision and, if accepted, an agreed location and contents.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.