feat: add support for CycloneDX 1.4 specification

[madpah]

feat: add support for output to CycloneDX 1.4 (draft)
feat: Error with return code 2 if attempting to output in JSON and SchemaVersion < 1.2
test: Multiple tests added

Closes #293, #280

Signed-off-by: Paul Horton phorton@sonatype.com

[jkowalleck]

i dont see why adding all the schema files to the project and doinng tests on JSON/XML is part of this project.
see #294 (comment)

[jkowalleck]

@madpah re #294 (review)
why add the JSON/XML/proto schema to the project? why ship it in the package?

Dont see a reason why the files should be part of this package's tests, as they are part of cyclonedx-python-lib already.
you could access the resources inside a package - via importlib or pkg

Saw the files are used in tests, to check output of cyclonedx-python-lib so why not add a validate capability to cyclonedx-python-lib ? it seams to be the perfect place.

❌
what were the cons? why did you decide to put the data-validation in a downstream CLI tool instead of the library that generates the data in the first place?

[madpah]

@jkowalleck - fair point on the schema validation comments - will look at moving these (where required) back to cyclonedx-python-lib.

I also think this becomes clearer given #298 (after our other Slack discussions).

[madpah]

@madpah re #294 (review) why add the JSON/XML/proto schema to the project? why ship it in the package?

Dont see a reason why the files should be part of this package's tests, as they are part of cyclonedx-python-lib already. you could access the resources inside a package - via importlib or pkg

Saw the files are used in tests, to check output of cyclonedx-python-lib so why not add a validate capability to cyclonedx-python-lib ? it seams to be the perfect place.

❌ what were the cons? why did you decide to put the data-validation in a downstream CLI tool instead of the library that generates the data in the first place?

Totally agree - have removed as covered in cylonedx-python-lib.