Add field-selector argument to installations list

[maniSbindra]

What does this change

Filter output of porter installation list based on any field/combination of fields using the --field-selector". Supports '=' ,e.g. --field-selector bundle.version=0.2.0,status.action=install. All fields from the json output are supported.

Output below

# output without field selector
$ porter installation list                                                                                                                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  NAMESPACE  NAME                    VERSION  STATE      STATUS     MODIFIED    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             differentporterinstall  0.2.0    installed  succeeded  2023-08-24  
             porter-hello            0.2.0    installed  succeeded  2023-08-21

# output using field selector
$ porter installation list --field-selector  "name=porter-hello,bundle.version=0.2.0,status.action=install,status.resultStatus=succeeded" 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  NAMESPACE  NAME          VERSION  STATE      STATUS     MODIFIED    
----------------------------------------------------------------------
             porter-hello  0.2.0    installed  succeeded  2023-08-21

# json output using field selector
$  porter installation list --field-selector  "name=porter-hello,bundle.version=0.2.0,status.action=install,status.resultStatus=succeeded"  -o json
[
  {
    "schemaType": "Installation",
    "schemaVersion": "1.0.2",
    "id": "01H8C1V1G19AH4PMQHAJ8PZBX9",
    "name": "porter-hello",
    "namespace": "",
    "bundle": {
      "repository": "ghcr.io/getporter/examples/porter-hello",
      "version": "0.2.0"
    },
    "status": {
      "runId": "01H8C1V4YEPKQK098NRFKD4AYQ",
      "action": "install",
      "resultId": "01H8C1VGHPZCEZRP3J4ATYCX3X",
      "resultStatus": "succeeded",
      "created": "2023-08-21T18:11:42.657996+05:30",
      "modified": "2023-08-21T18:11:46.125495+05:30",
      "installed": "2023-08-21T18:11:58.070842+05:30",
      "uninstalled": null,
      "bundleReference": "ghcr.io/getporter/examples/porter-hello:v0.2.0",
      "bundleVersion": "0.2.0",
      "bundleDigest": "sha256:276b44be3f478b4c8d1f99c1925386d45a878a853f22436ece5589f32e9df384"
    },
    "_calculated": {
      "resolvedParameters": null,
      "displayInstallationState": "installed",
      "displayInstallationStatus": "succeeded"
    }
  }
]

What issue does it fix

Closes #2871 and #2773

Notes for the reviewer

This implementation filters to be displayed installations based on the --field-selector argument, which supports filtering by all fields in the json output of porter installation list.

Checklist

• Did you write tests?
• Did you write documentation?
• Did you change porter.yaml or a storage document record? Update the corresponding schema file.
• If this is your first pull request, please add your name to the bottom of our Contributors list. Thank you for making Porter better! 🙇‍♀️

Reviewer Checklist

• Comment with /azp run test-porter-release if a magefile or build script was modified
• Comment with /azp run porter-integration if it's a non-trivial PR

[ludfjig]

/azp run porter-integration

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[troy0820]

Some nits and some comments to request changes around using reflect with installation/displayinstallation, etc.

The splitting on . and , and interface{}.

[maniSbindra]

Some nits and some comments to request changes around using reflect with installation/displayinstallation, etc.

The splitting on . and , and interface{}.

@troy0820 I have made modifications as per our discussion. Thanks

[schristoff]

LGTM. Thank you so much!!