Adding Apache Flink into the openctest framework

[o0BB0o]

Describtion

Adding a new project Apache Flink into the openctest framework.

Details

In order to make openctest applicable to the project Apache Flink, we did the following changes to the framework.

1. Adding files test_method_list.json, flink-core-default.tsv, and conf_params.txt and scripts under the identify_param folder and generate the mapping file (generate_ctest/ctest_mapping/ctests-flink-core.json).
2. Modified scripts under folders generate_ctest, generate_value, and run_ctestand completes the support for openctest to Apache Flink.
3. Records of the modifications on Apache Flink(release-1.16) for the purpose of logging and ctest-injection, please refer to the patch files here.

Some non-trival changes and why

1. parse_conf_file_yaml: Since Flink uses yaml files to parse in configurations, we added this function to let openctest able to parse in configurations files written in the format of yaml files.
2. /generate_ctest/main.py: len(mapping[param]) sometimes will not operate properly and stop the script from running for it might able to generate a numerical output. Changing it into len(associated_tests) helps solving the problem. ~~3. Possible Suggestion(Not Comitted): /identify_param/runner.py In line 64, we have the if statement if trace == "java.lang.Thread" But base on our review on the past projects ctest supports and how Logging Configuration API was those projects were being modified, we found out that the if statement above is not applicable to all the LOG sentences for sometimes the trace contains more infomation like line numbers. Changing the if statement above into if "java.lang.Thread" in trace could help solve the problem.~~ Closed PR for the suggestion above can be found here.

[tianyin]

This PR looks really cool! Thanks @jessicahuang523 for doing this! I believe this is a part of 527 so I let @Alex-Lian review the PR and potentially merge it.

Possible Suggestion(Not Comitted)

Could you send a separate PR for this? It looks a good fix and I can let @sampalomad merge it.

[o0BB0o]

This PR looks really cool! Thanks @jessicahuang523 for doing this! I believe this is a part of 527 so I let @Alex-Lian review the PR and potentially merge it.

Possible Suggestion(Not Comitted)

Could you send a separate PR for this? It looks a good fix and I can let @sampalomad merge it.

We could probably add that change to this PR. Or if a separate PR is preferred, we will go with that.

[tianyin]

A separate is preferred. Thank you for doing that!

[tianyin]

One PR should only do one thing (no matter whether it's small or big). A feature PR should not include some bug fixes that are not essential to the new feature.

[tianyin]

Thanks @jessicahuang523 for doing this!

Sorry I didn't realize there are multiple students doing it. Thanks @o0BB0o (or others if I'm still missing)!