Expand protocol test coverage for json1.0, query and cbor

[alextwoods]

This PR does three things (detailed in modifications section below):

1. Expand protocol test coverage for json1.0, query and cbor using directly translated smithy protocol tests.
2. Add support for new protocol test runner features to support the new tests.
3. Minor codegen updates to handle the protocol test models

Motivation and Context

This is a followup/expansion of #6230.

This change improves our protocol test coverage for the json1.0, query and cbor protocols and ensures that all cases covered by the official Smithy protocol tests are run.

Modifications

SDK Behavior changes:

• fix codegeneration for enums with numeric string values (eg "0" -> "VALUE_0"). There are NO existing AWS services using these - they are only present in protocol tests and without this change cause a compilation error.
• support XmlNamespace with non-nested uri (adds new constructor)

Protocol Test Runner updates:

• add a cborEquals body matcher (equivalent functionality to jsonEquals). Ensures that encoded bodies are functionally equal while allowing differences in the exact cbor bytes.
• add mustContain matchers to header and query params.
• jsonEquals body matcher - relax equality on whole number double vs integer (eg: we now consider 1.0 to be equal 1)
• queryEquals body matcher - adds a new body matcher for query that ensures encoded body (or request parameters) are functionally equal.
• add resolvedHost assertions
• support host given (allowing configuring custom endpoint)
• support requests with hostPrefixes/labels added (requires workarounds for wiremock - we need to avoid dns lookups being done for endpoints like "foo.localhost"
• Dynamic parsing of expected timestamp values - allowing fractional seconds with double values + either second or millisecond epoch values. Legacy tests use epoch milliseconds and smithy tests use epoch seconds.

Protocol Test Suite changes/Additions:

• Add a new query protocol service (under smithy-query) - used for the ported smithy query tests.
• Replace the old query protocol test suite with the new official ported smithy tests.
• Add a new json1.0 service + official ported smithy tests
• Replace the protocol tests for cbor with the official ported smithy tests.

FAQ

Why add a new query protocol service instead of replacing the existing one?
The existing query model/service is used in a large number of custom/hand written tests cases (eg: QueryExceptionTests). Adding a new service for the new protocol test suite allows us to leave these existing tests alone.

Testing

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Checklist

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document
• Local run of mvn install succeeds
• My code follows the code style of this project
• My change requires a change to the Javadoc documentation
• I have updated the Javadoc documentation accordingly
• I have added tests to cover my changes
• All new and existing tests passed
• I have added a changelog entry. Adding a new entry must be accomplished by running the scripts/new-change script and following the instructions. Commit the new file created by the script in .changes/next-release with your changes.
• My change is to implement 1.11 parity feature and I have updated LaunchChangelog

License

• I confirm that this pull request can be released under the Apache 2 license

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
8.2% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 80%)
C Reliability Rating on New Code (required ≥ A)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarQube for IDE

[RanVaknin]

I understand the java limitation of not being able to have a number as an enum value, but can you explain how this substitution works in practice?

[alextwoods]

When the value has leading digits (eg: 0 or 123_some_value) the regex will match, and then we just prefix it with "VALUE", so we end up with VALUE_0 and VALUE_123_SOME_VALUE for those cases.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been closed and the conversation has been locked. Comments on closed PRs are hard for our team to see. If you need more assistance, please open a new issue that references this one.