Move to upstream mockery

[eapolinario]

Tracking issue

#4934

Why are the changes needed?

Harder to contribute code for newer contributors and the codebase don't get upstream changes

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

In order to facilitate the migration to vektra/mockery, this PR sets up an environment where both versions of mockery are available. The current use of mockery is kept, and we can start moving to upstream mockery mock by mock, by switching to using mockery-v2 binary in the //go:generate directive, e.g. //go:generate mockery-v2 ... (notice that flags are passed using --, not -).

I added one example in flyteadmin. Notice how the call to generate the mock is slightly different SignalInterface:

- //go:generate mockery -name=SignalInterface -output=../mocks -case=underscore
+ //go:generate mockery-v2 --name=SignalInterface --output=../mocks --case=underscore --with-expecter

Notice the need to add --with-expecter in order to generate expecter structs.

How was this patch tested?

Setup process

Screenshots

Check all the applicable boxes

• I updated the documentation accordingly.
• All new and existing tests passed.
• All commits are signed-off.

Related PRs

Docs link

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.08%. Comparing base (0583f77) to head (8b12e0a).
Report is 130 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4937      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.10%   61.08%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         793      793              
  Lines       51156    51156              
==========================================
- Hits        31257    31251       -6     
- Misses      17027    17033       +6     
  Partials     2872     2872              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests-datacatalog	69.31% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flyteadmin	58.86% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
unittests-flytecopilot	17.79% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flytectl	68.31% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flyteidl	79.30% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flyteplugins	61.94% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flytepropeller	57.32% <ø> (ø)
unittests-flytestdlib	65.75% <ø> (ø)

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[eapolinario]

Once #5134 is merged I'm going to update this PR.

[eapolinario]

codespell CI check is being fixed in #5418.

[andrewwdye]

Depending on the timeline to manage the migration, do you know of a linter that would let us block new usage of go:generate mockery? I was looking at forbidigo, but I don't see a file exclusion

[eapolinario]

Good idea, although in the case of forbidigo it looks like it can't handle comments. In any case, I'm going to experiment with this in a separate PR. Maybe there's a way to restrict the linter to files in a PR (this might involve running a command via a run block in a gh action to list the go files in a PR, something like git diff --name-only master | grep '.go$' and pass that list to this tool).