feat: make scheme conditional on provided feature gates

[pmalek]

What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR makes the manager scheme to be conditional on the provided feature gates.

Apart from e.g. not registering schemes that we don't use this might come in handy later ;). For instance: doing some exploratory work for using client.Client in Store I noticed that this will be useful to have.

PR Readiness Checklist:

Complete these before marking the PR as ready to review:

• the CHANGELOG.md release notes have been updated to reflect any significant (and particularly user-facing) changes introduced by this PR

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 72.2% // Head: 72.4% // Increases project coverage by +0.2% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (9ccdd54) compared to base (2ff6462).
Patch coverage: 58.0% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main   #3539     +/-   ##
=======================================
+ Coverage   72.2%   72.4%   +0.2%     
=======================================
  Files        122     123      +1     
  Lines      14381   14384      +3     
=======================================
+ Hits       10395   10428     +33     
+ Misses      3314    3292     -22     
+ Partials     672     664      -8     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
internal/manager/scheme/scheme.go	25.0% <25.0%> (ø)
internal/manager/config.go	94.3% <100.0%> (ø)
internal/manager/controllerdef.go	98.7% <100.0%> (ø)
internal/manager/featuregates/feature_gates.go	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
internal/manager/run.go	48.4% <100.0%> (+4.2%)	⬆️
internal/manager/setup.go	46.4% <100.0%> (ø)
internal/dataplane/kongstate/service.go	67.3% <0.0%> (+1.2%)	⬆️
...ternal/controllers/gateway/httproute_controller.go	69.7% <0.0%> (+1.6%)	⬆️
...nternal/controllers/gateway/udproute_controller.go	73.7% <0.0%> (+2.1%)	⬆️
...nternal/controllers/gateway/tlsroute_controller.go	73.4% <0.0%> (+4.0%)	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[czeslavo]

Apart from e.g. not registering schemes that we don't use this might come in handy later ;). For instance: doing some exploratory work for using client.Client in Store I noticed that this will be useful to have.

Could you elaborate on this a little bit? Is this exploratory work related to using client.Client for dynamic objects unmarshaling or something like that? I'm just curious. :)

[pmalek]

Could you elaborate on this a little bit? Is this exploratory work related to using client.Client for dynamic objects unmarshaling or something like that? I'm just curious. :)

Something like this: #2250 but I managed to figure out a patch that incurs way less changes. This way, if we pursue this route for all object's CacheStore we'll be able to remove all the code responsible caching objects and rely on manager's client only (and it's caching, which is configurable https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/blob/9f4e5eded684bf47949689ec04c17b2df5de056f/pkg/cache/cache.go#L106-L149 ).