[feat] Support usage of separate Linode API for the domain client

[mabojars]

What this PR does / why we need it:

• Currently, CAPL does not allow targeting different Linode API instances for the domain client, and the client for the remaining resources. This use case is required by an internal project.
• Also, using custom CA certs is broken, due to the way CAPL initializes the linodego client (see below).

Which issue(s) this PR fixes: N/A

Special notes for your reviewer:

• Exposes new environment variables DNS Linode client configuration:
  • LINODE_DNS_URL - equivalent of the LINODE_URL, but applies only to the DNS client.
  • LINODE_DNS_CA - equivalent of the LINODE_CA, but applies only to the DNS client. If we target a different API instance than LINODE_URL, we might also need to provide different root CA certs.
  • If the above are not provided, default linodego logic applies (same as before).
• Implements a struct for Linode client configuration (ClientConfig), to keep things from becoming messy with the new parameters. Used as a DTO right after startup.
• Adds an info level log informing about the fallback of LINODE_DNS_TOKEN to LINODE_TOKEN happening. I've noticed this happens silently, and it would be nice to know.
• Drops the usage of the oauth2.Transport. This caused the custom TLS configuration to be silently discarded, due to an unexpected interaction with resty. The flow would go like this:
  • Set the LINODE_CA env var to a valid *.pem path.
  • Start CAPL
  • Eventually, CreateLinodeClient gets called, passing an oauth2.Transport (encapsulated in an oauth2.client) to linodego.NewClient.
  • During linodego client init, CA certs get initialized (if provided and valid).
  • The set the CA certs, linodego calls resty client SetRootCertificate. This in turn fails on casting the provided oauth2.Transport as an http.Transport and silently discards the TLS config.
    • resty SetRootCertificate attempts to load the TLS config into the Transport.
    • tlsConfig casts the client's Transport to http.Transport, but fails to do so (we provide an oauth2.Transport), and the flow errors out, yielding and unchanged client.
• Removes emitted log line counting in for controller test suite with events/logs. We've agreed with @eljohnson92 this does not bring much value, while being troublesome to maintain and debug.

TODOs:

• squashed commits - I'd prefer to squash on merge. The separate commits add valuable context.
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests
• adds or updates e2e tests

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.56180% with 44 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 66.14%. Comparing base (1b4a2b9) to head (b835501).

Files	Patch %	Lines
cmd/main.go	0.00%	33 Missing ⚠️
cloud/scope/common.go	76.00%	3 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
controller/linodemachine_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
controller/linodecluster_controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
controller/linodeplacementgroup_controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
controller/linodevpc_controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #436      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   66.27%   66.14%   -0.13%     
==========================================
  Files          76       76              
  Lines        3887     3908      +21     
==========================================
+ Hits         2576     2585       +9     
- Misses       1122     1131       +9     
- Partials      189      192       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[AshleyDumaine]

LGTM