feat(scm): add new native scm driver

[kneal]

PR includes the following changes:

• add a Bitbucket option for using the native driver
• add a native driver implentation based on the jenkins-x/go-scm library

closes go-vela/community#441

Notes:

• The SCM package has been functionally tested with a set of pipelines against GitHub and Bitbucket.
• I will not be adding docs yet because I do not recommend using the package until further testing is completed
• The new library has a lot of testing downsides I would like to re-think in next pr. (Documented with TODOs)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #542 (0b7c390) into master (74b5d14) will decrease coverage by 1.47%.
The diff coverage is 34.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #542      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   54.85%   53.38%   -1.48%     
==========================================
  Files         179      188       +9     
  Lines       14899    16073    +1174     
==========================================
+ Hits         8173     8580     +407     
- Misses       6409     7149     +740     
- Partials      317      344      +27     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
scm/native/changeset.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
scm/native/webhook.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
scm/native/access.go	22.42% <22.42%> (ø)
scm/native/repo.go	23.79% <23.79%> (ø)
scm/native/deployment.go	38.75% <38.75%> (ø)
scm/setup.go	79.22% <42.85%> (-20.78%)	⬇️
scm/native/authentication.go	67.12% <67.12%> (ø)
scm/native/opts.go	88.67% <88.67%> (ø)
scm/native/native.go	95.91% <95.91%> (ø)
scm/native/driver.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[cognifloyd]

Why "native"?
Other possibilities: "generic", "abstract", "shim"

[kneal]

I was originally thinking generic for the package name but we actually already use the native nomenclature in a few package interfaces. The thought was native might sync up with that thought better and do like the standard OAuth esque integrations and then other packages could focus on being more 1st class citizens to the individual SCMs if we want that.

Definitely not stuck on the name by any means, I'm largely indifferent on what we call it. I just thought in the moment it made sense when I was first structuring out the package/files.

[jbrockopp]

Could we update the copyright statement to use the current year? 👍

I think this change will need to be applied throughout the files being added here.

[jbrockopp]

Could we update the logging statements to reflect current state in the codebase? 👍

i.e.

server/scm/github/access.go

Lines 16 to 21 in 3fe3d7e

	// OrgAccess captures the user's access level for an org.
	func (c *client) OrgAccess(u *library.User, org string) (string, error) {
	c.Logger.WithFields(logrus.Fields{
	"org": org,
	"user": u.GetName(),
	}).Tracef("capturing %s access level to org %s", u.GetName(), org)

I think this change will need to be applied throughout the functions and files being added here.

[kneal]

Not sure what you mean by "current state" in this context? Could you elaborate?

[jbrockopp]

By current state, I mean what we currently have in the SCM codebase on the master branch 👍

That link I shared above should show what I'm talking about 😃

To clarify further with an example, I'd expect this line to be updated to:

Suggested change

	logrus.Tracef("Capturing %s access level to org %s", u.GetName(), org)
	c.Logger.WithFields(logrus.Fields{
	"org": org,
	"user": u.GetName(),
	}).Tracef("capturing %s access level to org %s", u.GetName(), org)

[kneal]

Ohh, I'm sorry I see it now. You mean using the client logger. Sorry, for some reason my eyes weren't picking up the difference. Yeah, super easy change!

[jbrockopp]

No need to apologize 😄 It's all good!

Hopefully you should be able to copy/paste almost all the logging statements from the current SCM code 👍

However, it may be tedious because there are a lot of them 😅

[kneal]

Better to get it out of the way now tho. So good call out!

[KellyMerrick]

@kneal looks like this has gone stale, so we're going to close for now, but are interested in adding more SCM providers. Please reopen if we want to move forward with it!