Remove Gson, Jackson and Everit JSON Schema Validation code dependencies

[poikilotherm]

A lot of places in the code base use the Gson or Jackson library to do JSON processing (and a bit of data binding).

These should be refactored to use Java EE JSON-P (around since EE7) and JSON-B instead, making the code base using more standards and lowering no of deps.

This is related to #4260

[pdurbin]

Related: Increasingly slow feedback loop for developers, increasingly large WAR files #5593

[poikilotherm]

Lately, I came back to look into #6694 now that we are on Payara 5 and can use Jakarta JSON-B standard now. This issue should be done before.

This refactoring should cleanup the direct dependency on org.everit.json.schema, too. A good replacement would be leadpony/justify, as it uses Jakarta EE APIs only and doesn't introduce the dependencies again transitively. The outdated libs where discussed in #7218/#7248, too.

Will adapt the title accordingly.

[pdurbin]

I gave this issue a shout out today: https://iqss.slack.com/archives/C010LA04BCG/p1697654377221549?thread_ts=1697642617.029569&cid=C010LA04BCG

[pdurbin]

@poikilotherm in Zulip, I just saw you write this:

"I can't help it: I think we need to get rid of the JsonPrinter/JsonReader classes, as described in #6810"

I thought this issue was mostly about removing the dependencies on third-party JSON libraries (Gson, Jackson, etc.) when we already have one that comes with Jakarta EE.

It's also about removing the JsonPrinter/JsonReader classes? Should that be a separate issue?

[poikilotherm]

Yeah, it might be it's own issue to split the tasks. On the other hand it is very often not easy to distinguish between these things, as there are code places where a few of the techs plus our own things mix and match.

[cmbz]

To focus on the most important features and bugs, we are closing issues created before 2020 (version 5.0) that are not new feature requests with the label 'Type: Feature'.

If you created this issue and you feel the team should revisit this decision, please reopen the issue and leave a comment.

[pdurbin]

I'm reviewing #10739 and actively suggesting we not dig ourselves in deeper with Gson. Let's use the platform we build on (Jakarta EE) instead. In short, I agree with @poikilotherm so I'll reopen this issue.