Add initial QA checks to CI/CD pipeline.

[Pierre-siddall]

PR Summary

Sci/Tech Reviewer:
Code Reviewer: @yaswant

Similarly to MetOffice/lfric_apps#200 and MetOffice/lfric_core#258 ukca needs some initial code quality checks to be performed. With the move to fortitude to lint fortran this PR uses the growss repository to invoke a reusable workflow which lints a predefined set of rules outlined in a fortitude.toml file.

closes #2
is blocked-by #24

Code Quality Checklist

(Some checks are automatically carried out via the CI pipeline)

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• My code follows the project's style guidelines
• Comments have been included that aid undertanding and enhance the
  readability of the code
• My changes generate no new warnings

Testing

• If shared files have been modified, I have run the UM and LFRic Apps rose
  stem suites
• If any tests fail (rose-stem or CI) the reason is understood and
  acceptable (eg. kgo changes)
• I have added tests to cover new functionality as appropriate (eg. system
  tests, unit tests, etc.)

trac.log

Security Considerations

• I have reviewed my changes for potential security issues
• Sensitive data is properly handled (if applicable)
• Authentication and authorisation are properly implemented (if applicable)

Performance Impact

• Performance of the code has been considered and, if applicable, suitable
  performance measurements have been conducted

AI Assistance and Attribution

• Some of the content of this change has been produced with the assistance
  of Generative AI tool name (e.g., Met Office Github Copilot Enterprise,
  Github Copilot Personal, ChatGPT GPT-4, etc) and I have followed the
  Simulation Systems AI policy
  (including attribution labels)

Documentation

• Where appropriate I have updated documentation related to this change and
  confirmed that it builds correctly

Sci/Tech Review

• I understand this area of code and the changes being added
• The proposed changes correspond to the pull request description
• Documentation is sufficient (do documentation papers need updating)
• Sufficient testing has been completed

Please alert the code reviewer via a tag when you have approved the SR

Code Review

• All dependencies have been resolved
• Related Issues have been properly linked and addressed
• CLA compliance has been confirmed
• Code quality standards have been met
• Tests are adequate and have passed
• Documentation is complete and accurate
• Security considerations have been addressed
• Performance impact is acceptable

[Pierre-siddall]

Given that the C091 checks raised warnings about the implementation of 22 different interfaces. It was decided for now this rule will be switched off in order to avoid large big bang style code changes.

[yaswant]

Nit-picking really: Please format the the Markdown properly.

[yaswant]

"C082" pointer-initialisation-in-declaration is currently in preview for fortitude-v0.8.0 (stable), which means it's only active when the --preview flag (or preview = true in config file) is used. Since we're still using v0.7.3 in growss, there may be other rules in this list that are also in preview.

Also, can you check if renaming the config file to .fortitude.toml works with v0.7.3