[FLINK-13173][tests] only run openSSL-based tests with flink.tests.with-openssl

[NicoK]

What is the purpose of the change

Rename flink.tests.force-openssl (introduced for Flink 1.9) to flink.tests.with-openssl and only run openSSL-based unit tests if this is set. This way, we avoid systems where the bundled dynamic libraries do not work. Travis seems to run fine and will have this property set.

For examples of such scenarios and why (for now) we cannot rely on automatic openSSL detection, please refer to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13172.

Brief change log

• rename flink.tests.force-openssl to flink.tests.with-openssl
• adapt SSLUtilsTest to the inverse logic and provide SSLUtilsTest#AVAILABLE_SSL_PROVIDERS accordingly

Verifying this change

I tested SSLUtilsTest in all combinations of having openSSL (not) available and w/o flink.tests.with-openssl so that openSSL is picked up or the test is failing if it is not.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

• Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
• The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
• The serializers: no
• The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
• Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: no
• The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
• If yes, how is the feature documented? not applicable

[flinkbot]

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 10287fc (Wed Aug 07 08:15:07 UTC 2019)

Warnings:

• No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

_{Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.}

Review Progress

• ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
• ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
• ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
• ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
• ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.

Details

The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
• @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
• @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
• @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
• @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

[flinkbot]

CI report for commit d642d1f: FAILURE Build

[flinkbot]

CI report for commit 17c2600: SUCCESS Build

[pnowojski]

LGTM % commit message. Can you copy the PR description into the commit when merging?