maven-plugin make it easier to scan dependend schemas

[Postremus]

Added new options scan.profiles and scan.exclude.profiles to filter the operations that are kept in the schema.
Only one of the configured profiles is needed to either include, or exclude, the operation. Exclusions are checked first, then inclusions. Extensions containing profiles have to start with "x-smallrye-profile", and will not be included in the openapi document.
Naming of these new options are kept in line with the openapi scan.package and scan.external.package options.

closes #952

[MikeEdgar]

@Postremus - thank you for putting this together, definitely some cool functionality. The thing I am wondering is, can it be done using standard annotations? For example, instead of a custom annotation, what if the @Extension annotation was used with names like x-smallrye-profile-external or x-smallrye-profile-internal. That would allow the user to assign a "profile" to endpoint methods that could be selected in the config - in this case external and internal. Extensions starting with x-smallrye-profile- would be dropped from the final result. It would also have the benefit of being usable with the static document.

Just an idea.

[Postremus]

@MikeEdgar
I like your idea.
This allows the user to simply set the include (or exclude) profiles using configuration. On the operation or paths, the profile extensions can be specified like this:

@Extension(name = "x-smallrye-profile-external", value = "")

Way simpler to use, and better user experience. I will update the implementation accordingly.

Thank you!

[Postremus]

Hi @MikeEdgar, I implemented the approach using profiles defined as part of extensions, like you suggested.
Please review again. Thanks!

[phillip-kruger]

@MikeEdgar please can you have a look ?

[MikeEdgar]

Thanks @Postremus. I'm planning on looking at this later today or tomorrow morning.

[MikeEdgar]

This looks good, thanks @Postremus . I left one small comment that you might update if you rebase again, but otherwise this looks reasonable. At some point it might be worthwhile to rearrange how things are scanned in the JAX-RS (and other) scanners so that the profiles are checked more pre-emptively, but I wouldn't worry about that now.

[MikeEdgar]

Not required, but if you re-base again you might rename this variable and the equivalent in the "exclude" method.