feat: Add esmapping-generator into jaeger binary

[Rohanraj123]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• part of Remove the need for external tools for managing Elasticsearch #6283

Description of the changes

• Decoupled the Esmapping generation logic from cmd/esmappnig-generator/main.go and kept it into reusable renderer package and then reimplemented the subcommand in the plugin/storage/es/esmapping-generator.go file and then registered in jaeger/main.go.

How was this change tested?

• go test ./... -count=1

Checklist

• I have read https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING_GUIDELINES.md
• I have signed all commits
• I have added unit tests for the new functionality
• I have run lint and test steps successfully
  • for jaeger: make lint test
  • for jaeger-ui: yarn lint and yarn test

[Rohanraj123]

@yurishkuro I think now this is perfectly decoupling the logic for generation in tool and then calling it from jaeger binary. Looking forward to your suggestions!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.00000% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.23%. Comparing base (04b1ea4) to head (757b117).
Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...mapping-generator/generator/esmapping_generator.go	66.66%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
internal/storage/elasticsearch/mapping/command.go	80.00%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6327      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.23%   96.23%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         373      377       +4     
  Lines       21406    21421      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits        20600    20614      +14     
  Misses        614      614              
- Partials      192      193       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
badger_v1	10.63% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
badger_v2	2.78% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
cassandra-4.x-v1-manual	16.64% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
cassandra-4.x-v2-auto	2.72% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
cassandra-4.x-v2-manual	2.72% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
cassandra-5.x-v1-manual	16.64% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
cassandra-5.x-v2-auto	2.72% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
cassandra-5.x-v2-manual	2.72% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-6.x-v1	20.43% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-7.x-v1	20.50% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-8.x-v1	20.66% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-8.x-v2	2.77% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
grpc_v1	12.20% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
grpc_v2	9.06% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
kafka-3.x-v1	10.36% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
kafka-3.x-v2	2.78% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
memory_v2	2.78% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
opensearch-1.x-v1	20.56% <ø> (+0.07%)	⬆️
opensearch-2.x-v1	20.55% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
opensearch-2.x-v2	2.78% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
tailsampling-processor	0.51% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
unittests	95.08% <75.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

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.

[yurishkuro]

how is a user expected to run this?

[yurishkuro]

lgtm overall, but some cleanup required

[yurishkuro]

Why do you need options as argument? It seems it's always passed as zero value

[Rohanraj123]

For testing purpose.

[yurishkuro]

it's not used in any way in tests. You set the params by passing CLI flags.

[Rohanraj123]

done !

[yurishkuro]

Thanks!