[fix]: SDE backend : PCF schema update with security issue fixed

[sachinargade123]

Description

Fixed

• Update PCF schema fields for SDE
• trivy worklow fix.

Pre-review checks

Please ensure to do as many of the following checks as possible, before asking for committer review:

• DEPENDENCIES are up-to-date. Dash license tool. Committers can open IP issues for restricted libs.
• Copyright and license header are present on all affected files

[adityagajbhiye9]

@FaGru3n Please merge this PR before #75 PR.

[FaGru3n]

Hi @adityagajbhiye9 and @sachinargade123

thanks for splitting your huge PR.

Just to remind you as part of the System Team i can not validate the content and the functionality against it.

I can only rely on your testing strategy and your knowledge how your product works. Also as followed our TRG´s you can also have a quick info what to ensure in your product. https://eclipse-tractusx.github.io/docs/release

I would also recommend the idea to have at least one committer in your product team. So please checkout also our guideline how to become a committer in our Eclipse project. https://eclipse-tractusx.github.io/docs/oss/contributor-committer#committer

As a general reminder following conventional commits https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ it is not recommended to use fixes and features in one PR could be missleading and could break your features.

Unless for upcomming release it is nessesary i know ... but keep in mind that you have to work against Eclipse Tractus X GitHub organisation not Catena-X GitHub Orga... (this is the reason to have a committer in your round)

[sachinargade123]

@FaGru3n
Thanks for information.
Let me asked from my team @dvasunin to review this PR.

[FaGru3n]

@FaGru3n Thanks for information. Let me asked from my team @dvasunin to review this PR.

i guess @dvasunin is only a contributor and can also not merge your PR

[FaGru3n]

Best Idea is that someone who can verify the content updates the PR´s and if no committer in your team is available, we can merge it but we have to trust your changes, so please keep aware of that.

[hzierer]

can you please add to the description why you want to downgrade Java 18 -> 17?

[hzierer]

Apart from that the PR LGTM.

Nevertheless it can't be merged until @adityagajbhiye9 has signed the ECA. (automatic check will fail)

[dvasunin]

LGTM

[FaGru3n]

LGTM

thanks for commenting the issue with your statement, but i would kindly ask if you can review the PR with an approval in the code section and then there is a "approve" option.
as shown in #74 (comment)

[dvasunin]

LGTM

[adityagajbhiye9]

can you please add to the description why you want to downgrade Java 18 -> 17?
It has been downgraded to 17 due to vulnerabilities in image eclipse-temurin:18 &19. So we decided to use java 17 image which doesn't contain high/critical vulnerabilities.

[hzierer]

see my comment below. Rest LGTM