Ensure missing implementations for new SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName variants are detected automatically

[de-jcup]

Situation

When #2847 was implemented, it took a long time to understand why an integration test did fail - the reason was, that the configuration model support is responsible for the decision, if source code is necessary or not - when not, the download will not start from PDS side...

It was not clear at a first glance that the implementation inside support was missing.

Wanted

If anybody extends something inside the configuration model in a way the configuration model support must be implemented, a test shall automatically fail and give a hint.

Solution

When #3005 has been implemented, we can extend the existing SecHubConfigurationModelSupportTest in following way:

          static Set<Class<? extends SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName> testedConfigClasses

	  @BeforeAll
	  void static init(){
		testedConfigClasses=new LinkedHashSet<>();
	  }
	  
          @Test
	  void source_necessary_for_SecHubWebScanApiConfiguration(){
		
		/* prepare */
		// ... Build model with SecHubWebScanApiConfiguration inside

		/* execute */
		// ...supportToTest....
		
		/* test ...*/
		// ... assertTrue(supportToTest.isSourceRequired(...))
		
		/* remember */
	        testedConfigClasses.add(SecHubWebScanApiConfiguration.class);
	  }
	  
	  
	  @AfterAll
	  static void assertAllConfigurationUsageImplementations() {
		List<Class<? extends SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName> classes = Reflections.getAllUsagesOf(SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName.class);
		
	        assertTrue(testConfigClasses.containsAll(classes);
		  
		List<Class<? extends SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName>> missing = new ArrayList<>();
		for(Class<? extends SechubDataConfigurationUsageByName> usage: classes){
		   if (!testConfigClasses.contains(usage)){
			missing.add(usage);
		   }
		}
		 
		if (usage.isEmpty(){
		     return;
		}
		fail("Some config classes are not tested: "+missing);
		  
           }