fix: routes with conflicting services

[mlavacca]

What this PR does / why we need it:
Gateway routes with conflicting services in their backend don't break config build.

Which issue this PR fixes:
Fixes #2565

Special notes for your reviewer:

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

[pmalek]

Minor comments, overall this looks 👍

[rainest]

We definitely want to at least alert on these in logs, and the original request wanted to actually skip the routes that would result from these altogether, rather than choosing an arbitrary set of services that do have equal annotations.

The latter part is both for visibility (you're more likely to check something that isn't working altogether than something that appears to work fine) and because we have no way of knowing which set of annotations is correct.

[mlavacca]

We definitely want to at least alert on these in logs, and the original request wanted to actually skip the routes that would result from these altogether, rather than choosing an arbitrary set of services that do have equal annotations.

The latter part is both for visibility (you're more likely to check something that isn't working altogether than something that appears to work fine) and because we have no way of knowing which set of annotations is correct.

I probably didn't get correctly what you meant In the issue. It's clearer to me now, I'm going to set the PR back to draft to reduce noise.

[mlavacca]

@pmalek @rainest this PR is ready to be reviewed again, PTAL

[pmalek]

Minor spelling nits, otherwise 👍

[mlavacca]

I'd like to have a review by @rainest as well, as he is the original author of the issue and questioned the first implementation.

[rainest]

Added an integration test since it's hard to think through the rule deletion and make HTTPRouteEssentials less massive. The whole "ingressRules is a list of services that we've appended routes to as we go through each rule, and deleting the service will in turn delete the routes" aspect of the parser is confusing to think through, even if I understand kinda why we did it.

Actually removed the log because the format string was never correct in the original error and would result in nonsense like

time="2022-10-05T11:28:48-07:00" level=error msg="the Kubernetes Services [&Service{ObjectMeta:{k8s-service-to-skip1  test-namespace    0 0001-01-01 00:00:00 +0000 UTC <nil> <nil> map[] map[konghq.com/foo:bar] [] [] []},Spec:ServiceSpec{Ports:[]ServicePort{},Selector:map[string]string{},ClusterIP:,Type:,ExternalIPs:[],SessionAffinity:,LoadBalancerIP:,LoadBalancerSourceRanges:[],ExternalName:,ExternalTrafficPolicy:,HealthCheckNodePort:0,PublishNotReadyAddresses:false,SessionAffinityConfig:nil,IPFamilyPolicy:nil,ClusterIPs:[],IPFamilies:[],AllocateLoadBalancerNodePorts:nil,LoadBalancerClass:nil,InternalTrafficPolicy:nil,},Status:ServiceStatus{LoadBalancer:LoadBalancerStatus{Ingress:[]LoadBalancerIngress{},},Conditions:[]Condition{},},} &Service{ObjectMeta:{k8s-service-to-skip2  test-namespace    0 0001-01-01 00:00:00 +0000 UTC <nil> <nil> map[] map[] [] [] []},Spec:ServiceSpec{Ports:[]ServicePort{},Selector:map[string]string{},ClusterIP:,Type:,ExternalIPs:[],SessionAffinity:,LoadBalancerIP:,LoadBalancerSourceRanges:[],ExternalName:,ExternalTrafficPolicy:,HealthCheckNodePort:0,PublishNotReadyAddresses:false,SessionAffinityConfig:nil,IPFamilyPolicy:nil,ClusterIPs:[],IPFamilies:[],AllocateLoadBalancerNodePorts:nil,LoadBalancerClass:nil,InternalTrafficPolicy:nil,},Status:ServiceStatus{LoadBalancer:LoadBalancerStatus{Ingress:[]LoadBalancerIngress{},},Conditions:[]Condition{},},}] cannot have different sets of konghq.com annotations. These Services are used in the same Gateway Route BackendRef together to create the Kong Service service-to-skipand must use the same Kong annotations"

We already were logging in the helper, which I didn't notice in the diff. That log does still have issues, but we can't fix them without changing further up the code, and that would potentially interfere with #3008.

Last change was some phrasing and incorrect PR numbers in the changelog.

Approving but leaving unmerged in case you wanted to look over my additional commits.