feat: add interface to support copy in batches

[tinect]

1. Why is this change necessary?

As a manufacturer of a flysystem adapter I want to be able to use the writeBatch-possibilities with a dedicated Interface until flysystem supports it out-of-the-box.

2. What does this change do, exactly?

• change the naming of CopyBatch to WriteBatch
• added dedicated WriteBatch-Adapter
• added Interface

3. Describe each step to reproduce the issue or behaviour.

4. Please link to the relevant issues (if any).

5. Checklist

• [x] I have rebased my changes to remove merge conflicts
• [x] I have written tests and verified that they fail without my change
• [x] I have created a changelog file with all necessary information about my changes
• [ ] I have written or adjusted the documentation according to my changes
• [ ] This change has comments for package types, values, functions, and non-obvious lines of code
• [x] I have read the contribution requirements and fulfill them.

[github-actions[bot]]

	Warnings
:warning:	Please be kind and add unit tests for your new code in these files: src/Core/Framework/Adapter/Filesystem/Adapter/AsyncAwsS3WriteBatchAdapter.php src/Core/Framework/Adapter/Filesystem/Plugin/WriteBatchInterface.php If you are sure everything is fine with your changes, you can resolve this warning. You can run `composer make:coverage` to generate dummy unit tests for files that are not covered

[AydinHassan]

hey @tinect what's the state here? Are you still working on it?

[tinect]

hey @tinect what's the state here? Are you still working on it?

Oh yes. I need to test it again and discuss the test case with shyim. I will ping you if I am ready.

[AydinHassan]

Got it 🫡

[tinect]

@AydinHassan It is ready :-)

[AydinHassan]

@tinect what's the reason for the rename? Is it worth it?

[tinect]

@tinect what's the reason for the rename? Is it worth it?

It is more style, while it has less to do with "copy", but with "write" regarding the filesystem/flysystem.

[AydinHassan]

okay thanks. I am off for few days now, and if no one gets to it before, I will organise an internal review end of next week and then we go from there. Hope that's okay!

[tinect]

Thank you, have nice days! :-)

[AydinHassan]

hey @tinect - we had a short discussion and the team is in agreement that the write -> copy change is not really worth the deprecations, could you update the PR please?

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 43.58%. Comparing base (21cee05) to head (a01f0fd). Report is 9077 commits behind head on trunk.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##            trunk    #4976       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   65.46%   43.58%   -21.89%     
===========================================
  Files        3677     3072      -605     
  Lines       82789    87180     +4391     
===========================================
- Hits        54201    37996    -16205     
- Misses      28588    49184    +20596     

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[tinect]

@AydinHassan ready :-) thank you.

[AydinHassan]

thanks @tinect I will import it now :)

[AydinHassan]

and it's merged 🎉 Thanks for working with us on this @tinect !