Cut license-list info, split off to new page

What does this MR do?

As part of discussing with @sam.white, let's start the deprecation process for #387561 (closed) by carving off the license-list information, which needs to be built out separately from the rest of the existing page.

Current State

All information is lumped together in the single License Compliance page. This functionality is partially being deprecated, partially not. Also the functionality spans across three different groups. We need to find a way to make the following perfectly clear to readers:

• What is being deprecated
• What the deprecated items are being replaced with
• What functionality is not impacted

Proposed Changes

• Split the current License Compliance page into two new pages: a new license_list page and a new license_check_rules page.
• Create a new license_approval_policies page with information on the new/replacement solution.

What is being deprecated and what is it being replaced with?

The new structure makes it easy to explain our deprecation strategy:

Deprecated Page	Replacement Page	Group Owner
compliance/license_compliance/index.md	/compliance/license_scanning_of_cyclonedx_files/index.md	Secure::Composition Analysis
compliance/license_check_rules.md	compliance/license_approval_policies.md	Govern::Security Policies

Note: The compliance/license_list.md page contains functionality that is not being deprecated and is owned by Govern::Threat Insights.

Related issues

• Related to Deprecate support for License Compliance CI Tem... (#387561 - closed)

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding or changing the main heading of the page (H1), ensure that the product tier badge is added.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

If you aren't sure which tech writer to ask, use roulette or ask in the #docs Slack channel.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.