Fix MongoDB integration containerized environment links

[saikumarvasa100-hash]

The relative links for containerized environment sections (Docker, Kubernetes, ECS) were using the format ?tab=xxx#xxx which doesn't retain the MongoDB context on the published docs site.

Changed:

• ?tab=docker#docker -> #docker
• ?tab=kubernetes#kubernetes -> #kubernetes
• ?tab=ecs#ecs -> #ecs

Fixes #21952

What does this PR do?

Motivation

Review checklist (to be filled by reviewers)

• Feature or bugfix MUST have appropriate tests (unit, integration, e2e)
• Add the qa/skip-qa label if the PR doesn't need to be tested during QA.
• If you need to backport this PR to another branch, you can add the backport/<branch-name> label to the PR and it will automatically open a backport PR once this one is merged

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex usage limits have been reached for code reviews. Please check with the admins of this repo to increase the limits by adding credits.
Credits must be used to enable repository wide code reviews.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Recommendation: Add qa/skip-qa label

This PR does not modify any files shipped with the agent.

To help streamline the release process, please consider adding the qa/skip-qa label if these changes do not require QA testing.

[domalessi]

@saikumarvasa100-hash Sorry, I previously reviewed this and then did a bit more testing! Left a comment with the behavior I'm seeing. I'm not sure if this is what you're intending.

[saikumarvasa100-hash]

the asked changes were done check again

[libander]

@saikumarvasa100-hash / @domalessi This PR made me wonder if "Configuration" might be the intended parent tab for these links, but after taking a closer look I realized there is nothing wrong with how the links were formatted. The sections they used to point to were replaced by tabbed examples in the docs. Since the in-app integration view does not support subsection anchors the way the docs site does, the links no longer have a valid target and send users back to the Integrations landing page.

I saw the same pattern in a couple of other integrations, so I opened #22011 to remove the outdated links. Thanks for your time!

[domalessi]

@libander Ah, okay, thank you for digging into that and for the follow-up. Does #22011 take care of things? Are we good to close this PR?

[libander]

@domalessi - Yes, #22011 handles the fixes. Good to close this PR. Thanks for taking a look.

[domalessi]

@libander Thanks for confirming! Closing out in favor of #22011