Refine Display implementation for FlightError

[BugenZhao]

Is your feature request related to a problem or challenge? Please describe what you are trying to do.

There's a TODO for a better std::fmt::Display implementation on FlightError. Currently it forwards to std::fmt::Debug, which does not appear to be a good practice as errors should describe themselves with friendly messages provided by Display.

arrow-rs/arrow-flight/src/error.rs

Lines 50 to 55 in ef5c45c

	impl std::fmt::Display for FlightError {
	fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result {
	// TODO better format / error
	write!(f, "{self:?}")
	}
	}

Describe the solution you'd like

Match the variants of the error and specify different prompts like what we did for ArrowError.

arrow-rs/arrow-schema/src/error.rs

Lines 79 to 87 in ef5c45c

	impl Display for ArrowError {
	fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result {
	match self {
	ArrowError::NotYetImplemented(source) => {
	write!(f, "Not yet implemented: {}", &source)
	}
	ArrowError::ExternalError(source) => write!(f, "External error: {}", &source),
	ArrowError::CastError(desc) => write!(f, "Cast error: {desc}"),
	ArrowError::MemoryError(desc) => write!(f, "Memory error: {desc}"),

Describe alternatives you've considered

Derive the implementation with thiserror. The code can be more concise with the cost of introducing a new build-time dependency.

Additional context

A better practice to implement Display for errors is NOT to include the error source. AWS SDK has adopted this as described in awslabs/aws-sdk-rust#657. However, this could be considered as a breaking change as many developers have not realize that one should leverage something like std::error::Report to get the error sources printed.

[tustvold]

label_issue.py automatically added labels {'arrow'} from #5439

[tustvold]

label_issue.py automatically added labels {'arrow-flight'} from #5439