refactor: swap satori's uuid package to gofrs

[mdanzinger]

Reason for Change:
Satori's go.uuid is effectively unmaintained and contained at least one critical security flaw which took half a year to be merged as the owner isn't active. See satori/go.uuid#75

Issue Fixed:

Requirements:

• uses conventional commit messages
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests
• tested upgrade from previous version

Notes:

[msftclas]

All CLA requirements met.

[mdanzinger]

/assign @mboersma

[tariq1890]

This is great!! Thank you @mdanzinger

[mboersma]

Some import errors were caught by make test-style.

[tariq1890]

@ultimateboy Are you okay with this Matt? IMO we should take this change as soon as possible. If you vendor aks-engine after this is merged, similar changes will have to be made in the projects that dep on aks-engine.

[tariq1890]

@amanohar @sozercan FYI. This should go into openshift as well.

[mdanzinger]

@mboersma The only new errors I receive are :

cmd/root.go:17: File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (gofmt) "github.com/pkg/errors" cmd/deploy_test.go:15: File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (gofmt) "github.com/pkg/errors" pkg/api/vlabs/validate.go:20: File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (gofmt) "github.com/pkg/errors"

Is that what you're referring to?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #466 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 40%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #466   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   53.43%   53.43%           
=======================================
  Files          95       95           
  Lines       14391    14391           
=======================================
  Hits         7690     7690           
  Misses       6038     6038           
  Partials      663      663

[tariq1890]

@mdanzinger The codecov patch seems to fail. Could you rebase this PR?

[mdanzinger]

@tariq1890 I've rebased, squashed my previous commits, and pushed (I had to force push due to me accidentally merging two diverging branches), but it seems like the codecov patch is still failing, any ideas why?

[tariq1890]

@mdanzinger The codecov patch diff is failing because you have changed a line which has had no coverage previously. Normally, we'd request the contributor to add tests to fill that gap. In this case, adding test cases for the said method is less straightforward and would involve too much work which would be well out of the bounds of this PR's scope.

So this PR LGTM. I would defer to the other maintainers on assessing the impact of this dep change as some projects vendor in aks-engine as a dependency.

[tariq1890]

@jackfrancis @mboersma I have tested vendoring this fork against other repos that utilize aks-engine and I've found that it works with no issues.

[mboersma]

/lgtm

[acs-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mboersma, mdanzinger

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [mboersma]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[welcome]

Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉🎉🎉

[tariq1890]

Thanks @mdanzinger :)