ci: add link checker

[bearomorphism]

Let's try this.

Closes #1691

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.88%. Comparing base (120d514) to head (7e5d8ae).
⚠️ Report is 886 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1696      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.33%   97.88%   +0.55%     
==========================================
  Files          42       60      +18     
  Lines        2104     2605     +501     
==========================================
+ Hits         2048     2550     +502     
+ Misses         56       55       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	97.88% <ø> (+0.55%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[bearomorphism]

@woile @Lee-W would you like to create issue form when broken link is found?

If we want to automatically create issues for broken links, we may need to adjust our repo settings

Failed run: https://github.com/commitizen-tools/commitizen/actions/runs/19989102721/job/57327236001
Potential solution: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70435286/resource-not-accessible-by-integration-on-github-post-repos-owner-repo-ac

[bearomorphism]

TBD

[Lee-W]

probbaly use it to create an issue instead of a PR?

[woile]

agreed, let's start with an issue

[bearomorphism]

Actually, I was thinking about the behavior of the pipeline when the link checker fails (non-empty error list) on a documentation PR.

[Lee-W]

probbaly use it to create an issue instead of a PR?

[bearomorphism]

@Lee-W @woile now this PR is ready. Could you take a look again? Thanks