Create docker runners factory and add scheme

[kbrock]

Defining the runners in a single place

• extracted from #147
• dependent upon this PR: https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-workflows/pull/63

Before

• types specified in came from Floe::Workflow::Runner::TYPES and exe/floe
• class names specified in exe/floe and manageiq-providers-workflow
• default specified in Floe::Workflow::Runner::TYPES and exe/floe
• users of floe need to know internal class names

After

• types and class names only specified in Floe::Workflow::Runner
• use Floe.set_runner to specify the name of the runner
• deprecated old docker_runner= interface
• support multiple schemes

[kbrock]

update:

• fixed ArgumentError (when you specify an invalid docker runner name

[kbrock]

Complexities that I can remove if you want:

1. can remove supporting multiple schemas
2. can remove supporting register with or without schema

[kbrock]

update:

• split into 2 commits (1 for factory, 1 for schemas)
• ensured it supports passing in workflow instance or strings

update:

• fixed bad rebase

[kbrock]

update:

• extracted schema changes into a separate PR

[kbrock]

update:

• updated version number to 0.8.0
• dropped docker_runner=
• added entries to readme and changelog

update:

• dropped version.freeze (rubocop)

[kbrock]

update:

• rebased (fixed conflict)
• example tags
• uppercased yarddoc params (Name)
• changed logger comment to "logging actions"

[kbrock]

update:

• rebase

update:

• no longer drop set_runner (aka, we leave that in for now)

[kbrock]

update:

• merged #153 into this one.

I had thought that pulling out the addition of a scheme would simplify things, but instead it has only added naming questions and confusion.

[miq-bot]

Checked commits https://github.com/kbrock/floe/compare/51d1917ac386bd3c2a364fb54a99901861cb7b87~...0d6b3a1f693b53607b7bf14e8625a04181683a36 with ruby 2.7.8, rubocop 1.56.3, haml-lint 0.51.0, and yamllint 2 files checked, 0 offenses detected Everything looks fine. :cookie: