feat: support message bus to sync metadata changes

[wangxye]

What type of PR is this?

/sig iot
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Since MessageBus is now the default inter-communication method for EdgeX, yurt-iot-dock should switch to MessageBus, and supports synchronization of message bus-driven metadata changes.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #1799

Special notes for your reviewer:

/assign @LavenderQAQ
/assign @Rui-Gan

other Note

There are still the following issues to be resolved:

• Openyurt side supports CRUD based on message bus;
• Real-time asynchronous acquisition of device data;

Example of Test
users:
# curl -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json'  \
http://edgex-core-metadata:59881/api/v3/device \
-d '[
         {
            "apiVersion": "v3",
            "device": {
               "name":"Camera",
               "serviceName": "device-rest",
               "profileName": "sample-numeric",
               "description": "My test camera",
               "adminState": "UNLOCKED",
               "operatingState": "UP",
               "protocols": {
                  "Onvif": {
                     "Address": "192.168.0.1",
                     "Port": "80",
                     "MACAddress": "xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx",
                     "FriendlyName":"Default Camera"
                  },
                  "CustomMetadata": {
                     "Location":"Front door"
                  }
               }
            }
         }
]'

openyurt:
# kubectl get device | grep camera
hangzhou-camera             hangzhou   true     5s

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 73 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 52.22%. Comparing base (3dd6c5c) to head (063d15f).
Report is 55 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
pkg/yurtiotdock/controllers/util/messagebus.go	0.00%	41 Missing ⚠️
pkg/yurtiotdock/controllers/util/health_checker.go	0.00%	32 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1955      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   52.23%   52.22%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         173      175       +2     
  Lines       21117    21088      -29     
==========================================
- Hits        11031    11014      -17     
- Misses       9110     9124      +14     
+ Partials      976      950      -26     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	52.22% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[wangxye]

/rerun

[wangxye]

/assign @LavenderQAQ
/assign @Rui-Gan

[LavenderQAQ]

/assign

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
6 New issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[wangxye]

/rerun

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[wangxye]

@LavenderQAQ Do you have time to look at this? We have not yet dealt with this.