feat: support to subflows on the Java DSL

[matheusandre1]

Many thanks for submitting your Pull Request ❤️!

What this PR does / why we need it:
Closes: #1151

Special notes for reviewers:

Additional information (if needed):

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[mcruzdev]

It looks great @matheusandre1, could you add a test running a workflow with your changes?

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[ricardozanini]

Looks solid, we just need to add the Function to the input or it's useless for the FuncDSL (unless jq scripting).

[fjtirado]

Looks solid, we just need to add the Function to the input or it's useless for the FuncDSL (unless jq scripting).

@ricardozanini The Function should be located at the experimental module, I think it can be another PR.

[ricardozanini]

Indeed, the Function can be added to a new PR - or directly to this one. Not sure why not. I do the DSL changes in both sides all the time since one influence the other.

[matheusandre1]

@mcruzdev aproove?

[mcruzdev]

Hi @matheusandre1, when a said test I would like something like FuncDSLDataFlowTransformationHelpersTest#test_input_with_outputAs.

Executing the new DSL method with a WorkflowApplication:

    try (WorkflowApplication app = WorkflowApplication.builder().build()) {
      WorkflowDefinition def = app.workflowDefinition(workflow);

      WorkflowModel model = def.instance(10L).start().join();
      Number number = model.asNumber().orElseThrow();

      softly.assertThat(number.longValue()).isEqualTo(25L);
    }

The test you added is so good, but I think we need to test executing too.

[matheusandre1]

I'm going to do it.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[mcruzdev]

Hi @matheusandre1, it is close. You need to test what you added here. Instead use the enrichOutputWithTaskTest workflow use that one you added on testDoTaskRunWorkflow test:

    Workflow wf =
        WorkflowBuilder.workflow("parentFlow")
            .tasks(
                d ->
                    d.workflow(
                        "runChild",
                        w ->
                            w.namespace("org.acme")
                                .name("childFlow")
                                .version("1.0.0")
                                .input(Map.of("id", 42, "region", "us-east"))
                                .await(false)
                                .returnType(RunTaskConfiguration.ProcessReturnType.NONE)))
            .build();

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[fjtirado]

actually the object passed to the task is the task ouput, so you should write (Long taskOutput, worlflowContext, taskContextData) and avoid the call to output(taskContextData, Long.class);`
@mcruzdev please make sure the usage docs CLEARLY reflec this

[mcruzdev]

The documentation update makes sense, we can do it in another pull request.

I think we need to remove this test, it is duplicated, there is another test that do the same thing in the codebase (@matheusandre1 please remove it).

[fjtirado]

This is fine, althoug kind of weird, but I guess make sense in a test