feat(openapi): upgrade to 6.3.0 phase1

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

Commit to be reviewed

---

feat(openapi): upgrade to 6.3.0 phase1

Primary Changes
---------------
1. Updated openapitoos.json for various plugins to use 6.3.0
version of openapi generator
2. Relevant code for each plugin was generated

openapitools.json is updated for the following plugins to
incorporate 1)
------------------------------------------------------------
a. extensions/cactus-plugin-htlc-coordinator-besu
b. packages/cactus-plugin-htlc-eth-besu
c. packages/cactus-plugin-htlc-eth-besu-erc20
d. packages/cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-besu
e. packages/cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-quorum
f. packages/cactus-cmd-api-server
g. packages/cactus-core-api
h. packages/cactus-plugin-consortium-manual
i. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-aws-sm
j. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-azure-kv
k. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-google-sm
l. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-memory
m. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-memory-wasm
n. packages/cactus-plugin-keychain-vault
o. packages/cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-ubiquity
p. packages/cactus-plugin-ledger-connector-xdai packages/cactus-plugin-odap-hermes
q. examples/cactus-example-carbon-accounting-business-logic-plugin

Fixes #2298
Depends on #2272

[petermetz]

@jagpreetsinghsasan LGTM, thank you for breaking this up into more digestible chunks!
I did a rebase on it, hopefully the CI will start passing, it seemed like the build failed due to some network issue on the server side (couldn't fetch the jar of the openapi generator).
I tested it on my local machine and it worked fine.

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

@jagpreetsinghsasan LGTM, thank you for breaking this up into more digestible chunks! I did a rebase on it, hopefully the CI will start passing, it seemed like the build failed due to some network issue on the server side (couldn't fetch the jar of the openapi generator). I tested it on my local machine and it worked fine.

@petermetz we will need this PR to be reviewed and merged first: #2272 (once 2272 gets merged, I will run a quick test again on this PR)

[petermetz]

@petermetz we will need this PR to be reviewed and merged first: #2272 (once 2272 gets merged, I will run a quick test again on this PR)

@jagpreetsinghsasan Whaaat. Sorry I must've messed something up with the issue creation. I meant to define the tasks in a way that phase 2 depends on phase 1 being done first not the other way around. 😅
Anyway, if that is how it is now with dependencies then please make sure to mark this as a dependent of the phase 2 PR that you linked to otherwise I might accidentally merge this first (the robot helps a lot by blocking the merge when there's unresolved PR dependencies)

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

@petermetz we will need this PR to be reviewed and merged first: #2272 (once 2272 gets merged, I will run a quick test again on this PR)

@jagpreetsinghsasan Whaaat. Sorry I must've messed something up with the issue creation. I meant to define the tasks in a way that phase 2 depends on phase 1 being done first not the other way around. sweat_smile Anyway, if that is how it is now with dependencies then please make sure to mark this as a dependent of the phase 2 PR that you linked to otherwise I might accidentally merge this first (the robot helps a lot by blocking the merge when there's unresolved PR dependencies)

@petermetz , no no, you havent created the issues in the wrong order.

The PR: #2272 is the phase 2 of generating kotlin clients
If that gets merged, we will have kotlin clients (with the 5.x version of openapi-generator)

Once that gets merged, I need to re-test this PR again (because now its 6.x version of openapi-generator in this PR, and even that might have some conflicts with the kotlin clients). This is phase 1 of 6.x version upgrade.

[github-actions]

This PR/issue depends on:

• build(openapi): phase 2 - generate kotlin clients #2272
  By Dependent Issues (🤖). Happy coding!

[petermetz]

@jagpreetsinghsasan The build started breaking on the CI after rebasing, please take a look!
2023-04-18T04:58:36-ci-crash.log

[petermetz]

@jagpreetsinghsasan LGTM

FYI: I resolved the merge conflicts and rebased this onto upstream/main