ci(danger): disable CHANGELOG check

[Flash0ver]

Now with #4818, which should automatically generate CHANGELOG entries on release (via the PR title or a section in the PR description, we want to disable the changelog-validation of our danger action / workflow.

For example, #4899 still asks us to Please consider adding a changelog entry for the next release..

[github-actions]

Semver Impact of This PR

⚪ None (no version bump detected)

📋 Changelog Preview

This is how your changes will appear in the changelog.
Entries from this PR are highlighted with a left border (blockquote style).

---

Dependencies ⬆️

Deps

• chore(deps): update Java SDK to v8.32.0 by github-actions in #4843
• chore(deps): add protobuf-javalite 3.25.8 dependency on Android by github-actions in #4843
• chore(deps): Bumped Xamarin.AndroidX.Lifecycle.Common.Java8 and CommunityToolkit.Mvvm to 2.2.20 and 8.4.0 by jamescrosswell in #4876

Other

• ci(danger): disable CHANGELOG check by Flash0ver in #4910

• ci: Skip device tests for non-mobile PRs by bruno-garcia in #4909

---

_{🤖 This preview updates automatically when you update the PR.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 73.88%. Comparing base (9a88d5e) to head (ecc9da3).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4910      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.85%   73.88%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         494      494              
  Lines       17868    17868              
  Branches     3509     3509              
==========================================
+ Hits        13197    13202       +5     
+ Misses       3815     3807       -8     
- Partials      856      859       +3     

☔ 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.

[jamescrosswell]

It doesn't look like there's any way to configure the danger action to skip the changelog check.

They don't appear to be using this workflow at all in the Python repository. I think we need to remove it.

The only question then is if we can recreate some of the checks that were actually valuable from that workflow. 3 of these 4 checks are probably still useful.

We could copy this action into our own repo so that we could use our own dangerfile.js... which would also be 99% copied from here. That seems kinda daft though. Ideally we would tweak the original action so that it accepted another parameter (skip-changelog-check or something like that) which it could pass to the danger check here. I'm not sure if that's possible... would need to investigate the docs for danger.