Workaround for Netty MixedFileUpload bug

[yawkat]

This is a fix for netty/netty#12627 . This patch changes MixedFileUpload to use its own reference count independent of the underlying storage (memory or file), so that the ref count isn't lost when switching storage mode. I copied the DefaultHttpDataFactory and MixedFileUpload from netty to apply this change.

We can revert this change once a netty fix is available (though we should keep the test).

Fixes #7699

[sonarcloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
8 Code Smells

64.5% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

[yawkat]

not fixing the code smells because they're in copied code and i dont want to modify it further than necessary

[sdelamo]

Can we target 3.5.x as the base since this is a bug fix and also use the original Netty license headers?

[yawkat]

i couldnt use the original license headers, because of our checkstyle rules, but it's the same license (apache), just with 'netty project' instead of 'original authors' (which would be netty in this case), so i hope it's fine?

I don't want to target a patch release because imo it's a fairly intrusive change (essentially replacing two classes) for an issue that not many people seem to hit

[sdelamo]

i couldnt use the original license headers, because of our checkstyle rules, but it's the same license (apache), just with 'netty project' instead of 'original authors' (which would be netty in this case), so i hope it's fine?

We have exclusions for licenses in spotless Gradle plugin where forked a file and keep the original license.

In theory,

[sdelamo]

can you create an issue so that we remember to remove these classes once a patch is available in Netty?

[yawkat]

@sdelamo #7746

Good to know, should I fix the license header, or do you think it's fine since it's such a small difference?

[sdelamo]

Good to know, should I fix the license header, or do you think it's fine since it's such a small difference?

I think the correct thing is to use the original license headers, but I am not a license expert.

Since we are going to delete these files as soon as #7746 is complete, I think it is ok to keep them as they currently are since they are both Apache 2.0.