Changes to make code review more efficient

What does this MR do?

Review app link: http://main-ee-89706.35.193.151.162.nip.io/ee/development/code_review.html

Changes to make code review easier:

• Link to Contribution acceptance criteria, which includes "keeping it small", and "fixing one thing"
• Adds that Reviewer is responsible for checking MR meets contribution acceptance criteria
• Adds that Reviewer is responsible for help guide to split large MRs, and review subsequent changes

Why ? Better definition of responsibilities ensures that Maintainers don't receive MRs that could have been broken up. Smaller MRs get merged faster!

Also re-organise the first section to be more concise

Sparked from a recent Development Group Conversation (See CY2022 - Group Conversation Agenda doc, 2022-06-08 Development Group Conversation item 6)

Related issues

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 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.