BREAKING: add new classes for vulnerabilities

[knqyf263]

Description

This PR introduces new classes, vuln-os-pkgs and vuln-lang-pkgs. Packages and Vulnerabilities are stored separately.

Before

There is a single target including both packages and vulnerabilities.

{
	"Target": "rails:latest (centos 8.3.2011)",
	"Class":  "os-pkgs",
	"Type":   "centos",
	"Packages": {
		{
			"Name":            "binutils",
			"Version":         "2.30",
			"Release":         "93.el8",
			"Epoch":           0,
			"Arch":            "aarch64",
			"Licenses":       ["GPLv3+"],
		}
	},
	"Vulnerabilities": {
		{
			"VulnerabilityID":  "CVE-2018-20623",
			"PkgName":          "binutils",
			"InstalledVersion": "2.30-93.el8",
			...
		}
	}
}

After

There are two targets for packages and vulnerabilities.

{
	"Target": "rails:latest (centos 8.3.2011)",
	"Class":  "os-pkgs",
	"Type":   "centos",
	"Packages": {
		{
			"Name":            "binutils",
			"Version":         "2.30",
			"Release":         "93.el8",
			"Epoch":           0,
			"Arch":            "aarch64",
			"Licenses":       ["GPLv3+"],
		}
	}
},
{
	"Target": "rails:latest (centos 8.3.2011)",
	"Class":  "vuln-os-pkgs",
	"Type":   "centos",
	"Vulnerabilities": {
		{
			"VulnerabilityID":  "CVE-2018-20623",
			"PkgName":          "binutils",
			"InstalledVersion": "2.30-93.el8",
			...
		}
	}
}

Checklist

• I've read the guidelines for contributing to this repository.
• I've followed the conventions in the PR title.
• I've added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• I've updated the documentation with the relevant information (if needed).
• I've added usage information (if the PR introduces new options)
• I've included a "before" and "after" example to the description (if the PR is a user interface change).

[afdesk]

these cycles look like the same, isn't it?

[knqyf263]

No, we have to take packages from report.Results before writing the table output

[knqyf263]

added a comment
1ed1d28