[20849] New max_message_size property to limit output datagrams size (backport #770)

[mergify]

Description

This PR adds the documentation for max_message_size property in RTPS Writer and RTPS Participant.

@Mergifyio backport 2.14.x 2.13.x 2.10.x 2.6.x

Related implementation PR:

• [20849] New max_message_size property to limit output datagrams size Fast-DDS#4777

Contributor Checklist

• Commit messages follow the project guidelines.
• Code snippets related to the added documentation have been provided.
• Documentation tests pass locally.
• Applicable backports have been included in the description.

Reviewer Checklist

• The PR has a milestone assigned.
• The title and description correctly express the PR's purpose.
• Check contributor checklist is correct.
• CI passes without warnings or errors.

---

This is an automatic backport of pull request #770 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).

[mergify]

Cherry-pick of 91d96b8 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/2.6.x/pr-770
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/2.6.x'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 91d96b8.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   code/DDSCodeTester.cpp
	both modified:   code/XMLTester.xml
	both modified:   docs/fastdds/property_policies/non_consolidated_qos.rst

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

[Mario-DL]

I saw that the implementation PR (eProsima/Fast-DDS#4777) was not backported to 2.6.x. Is this feature going to be in 2.6.x ?
CC: @elianalf @MiguelCompany

[MiguelCompany]

I saw that the implementation PR (eProsima/Fast-DDS#4777) was not backported to 2.6.x. Is this feature going to be in 2.6.x ? CC: @elianalf @MiguelCompany

I forgot to backport from 2.10.x. Requested here