[feat][misc] Add Pulsar BOM (Bill of Materials)

[onobc]

This commit introduces the pulsar-bom module which fulfills PIP-326 by providing a Maven BOM to ease dependency management.

PIP: PIP-326

Motivation

As described in PIP-326, the purpose of this change is to provide a Maven BOM to ease dependency management for consumers of Pulsar.

Modifications

• Adds a new pulsar-bom module that provides the Maven BOM
• The included pom.xml was auto-generated using the provided gen-pulsar-bom.sh script.
• The script can be run anytime to update the <dependencyManagement> section in the pom.xml w/ the latest published Pulsar modules.

Verifying this change

• Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
• Add automated test app that consumes the BOM (??)

❓This change adds a Maven BOM that consumers of the Pulsar library can use. As such, it is not your typical test approach to verify this. I have verified manually using a local test app. Should I add an automated test/app that consumes the BOM? If so, where would be the best place to add this in the repo?

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

• Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
• The public API
• The schema
• The default values of configurations
• The threading model
• The binary protocol
• The REST endpoints
• The admin CLI options
• The metrics
• Anything that affects deployment (since this is a new published module, possibly fits this box?)

Documentation

• doc
• doc-required
• doc-not-needed
• doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

PR in forked repository: onobc#3

[merlimat]

@onobc Should we also add a mention in the Java client docs page on how to use the BOM?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 13 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (6560a21) 73.55% compared to head (7c43aea) 73.55%.
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master   #21871   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     73.55%   73.55%           
- Complexity    32314    32322    +8     
=========================================
  Files          1858     1859    +1     
  Lines        138201   138281   +80     
  Branches      15150    15156    +6     
=========================================
+ Hits         101652   101712   +60     
- Misses        28665    28681   +16     
- Partials       7884     7888    +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
inttests	24.13% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
systests	23.82% <1.11%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
unittests	72.83% <85.55%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
...che/bookkeeper/mledger/impl/ManagedLedgerImpl.java	80.90% <100.00%> (ø)
...pache/bookkeeper/mledger/offload/OffloadUtils.java	77.47% <100.00%> (ø)
...dbalance/extensions/ExtensibleLoadManagerImpl.java	78.09% <100.00%> (-1.01%)	⬇️
...xtensions/channel/ServiceUnitStateChannelImpl.java	84.46% <ø> (-0.32%)	⬇️
...alance/extensions/manager/StateChangeListener.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...r/loadbalance/extensions/models/UnloadCounter.java	93.84% <ø> (ø)
...ulsar/broker/stats/prometheus/metrics/Summary.java	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...lance/extensions/channel/StateChangeListeners.java	84.61% <80.00%> (-3.62%)	⬇️
...va/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/ServerCnx.java	71.98% <61.53%> (-0.07%)	⬇️
.../loadbalance/extensions/manager/UnloadManager.java	87.75% <89.28%> (+6.12%)	⬆️

... and 65 files with indirect coverage changes

[lhotari]

LGTM

[onobc]

@onobc Should we also add a mention in the Java client docs page on how to use the BOM?

Sorry, I missed this comment @merlimat . Yes, that is a good idea. I can add that.