Timezone aware datetimes + remove hack from #209

[mikaelarguedas]

This PR (basically a redo of https://github.com/ros2/sros2/pull/210) does:

• Set timezone to UTC explicitly in all security artifacts
  • this allows to remove the -1 day hack from https://github.com/ros2/sros2/pull/209
  • I don't think it fixes any kind of issue and would assume the issue have been fixed on the connext side in version 6
  • But I think it's more explicit and doesnt hurt
• Make python datetime object timezone-aware, as this will be mandatory in future versions of python and reduces unexpected behaviors

I dont have a connext setup (license plugins etc right now) and the ROS 2 CI machines seem to be UTC so maybe they wont reflect the issue. If a reviewer that is behind UTC and has the right setup can give it a try that'd be awesome

[mikaelarguedas]

@marcoag @clalancette is it possible to launch a round of CI for this PR please :pray:

[ahcorde]

• Linux
• Linux-aarch64
• Windows

[mikaelarguedas]

@ruffsl interested in having your feedback on this.

(all info in the description of the PR)

[mikaelarguedas]

CI on WIndows is failing because CI is using a lower version of Python than the one defined in REP-2000. More details at https://github.com/ros-infrastructure/ros2-cookbooks/pull/69

[clalancette]

CI on WIndows is failing because CI is using a lower version of Python than the one defined in REP-2000. More details at ros-infrastructure/ros2-cookbooks#69

I commented over there, but in short, we are not going to be able to update Python. So we'll have to figure out another solution.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 77.38%. Comparing base (0b6ac75) to head (03a1e3e).

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## rolling #300 +/- ## =========================================== + Coverage 77.35% 77.38% +0.03% =========================================== Files 25 25 Lines 627 628 +1 Branches 66 66 =========================================== + Hits 485 486 +1 Misses 121 121 Partials 21 21 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/ros2/sros2/pull/300/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=ros2) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/ros2/sros2/pull/300/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=ros2) | `77.38% <100.00%> (+0.03%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=ros2#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mikaelarguedas]

~@ahcorde @clalancette is it possible to launch CI on that version to see if Windows is happy with it ?~

[mikaelarguedas]

• Linux

• Linux-aarch64

• Windows

• Windows debug

[sloretz]

@marcoag mind giving this a try with connect? 🧇