Review technical documentation files

[edhamiltonHO]

Which content do you think should be reviewed? Documentation files in repo root, e.g. README.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, and the technical decision log

Why do you think we should review this? As part of the migration to UKHomeOffice and new hosting, a number of our files will need to be amended. Also the technical decision log will need to reflect the chance

Please confirm the below

• [x] I have checked through the issues on the repository and don't think this has already been suggested

[edhamiltonHO]

Needs to cover at minimum

• [x] Update CONTRIBUTING.md for

  • [x] Make changes - do we want this to recommend forking the repo?
  • [x] Pull requests - to reference CODEOWNERS in 'who can merge your PR'
  • [x] Build, release, deploy - Update deployment detail (currently states GitHub pages)
  • [x] Branching strategy - remove reference to GitHub pages

• [x] Update README.md - remove reference to GitHub pages

• [x] Update SECURITY.md - change guidance for reporting a vulnerability to 'raise an issue' or email segas@digital.homeoffice.gov.uk

• [x] Technical decision log - to include decision to migrate repo, and move hosting to HO platform

[keithkennedyHO]

Make changes - do we want this to recommend forking the repo?

I am not aware of us requiring this as other repositories do so unsure here. This is not how PRs generated by guilds or development teams are working (which is fine, of course). However, for external contributors, this is a good approach to take, I think and worth suggesting.

[edhamiltonHO]

OK, I think leave this as is, it is not broken

Looking through though I noticed that section on raising a security vulnerability issue was out of sequence and interfering with the flow for making a change. I've added little commit to fix