Remove unused injections of ResourceProvider

[amiramw]

What it does

Remove unused injections of ResourceProvider.

How to test

Compile theia successfully.

Review checklist

• as an author, I have thoroughly tested my changes and carefully followed the review guidelines

Reminder for reviewers

• as a reviewer, I agree to behave in accordance with the review guidelines

[akosyakov]

I don't think these APIs are used by downstream.

[amiramw]

i forgot to sign my commit. should the eca voter fail on that?

[akosyakov]

i forgot to sign my commit. should the eca voter fail on that?

cc @eclipsewebmaster @marcdumais-work ?

[amiramw]

signed it now

[marcdumais-work]

i forgot to sign my commit. should the eca voter fail on that?

I did not have time to look before you signed. Did the ECA check pass without the signature?

[amiramw]

I did not have time to look before you signed. Did the ECA check pass without the signature?

correct

[marcdumais-work]

correct

My memory is a bit hazy but IIRC the signature may only be required when the author is not a committer on the project. @vince-fugnitto is trying to test this with bogus PRs and the help of our non-committer students.

[marcdumais-work]

the signature may only be required when the author is not a committer on the project. @vince-fugnitto is trying to test this with bogus PRs and the help of our non-committer students.

Not definite proof that this is the way it's intended to be, but it looks like the theory above checks-out in practice. Here are 3 PRs that have an unsigned commit:

• PR by a committer directly in this repo: ECA check passed
• PR by a committer originating from a fork: ECA check passed
• PR by a non-committer originating from a fork: ECA check NOT passed

[marcdumais-work]

This seems to confirm the theory:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=466480#c1