Use API to generate EPs and remove OCM support

[maksymvavilov]

Use a new API from dns-operator and remove all multicluster stuff

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.23529% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 81.13%. Comparing base (ece13e8) to head (1c1005c).
Report is 194 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
controllers/dnspolicy_dnsrecords.go	84.00%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #799      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.20%   81.13%   +0.92%     
==========================================
  Files          64       89      +25     
  Lines        4492     6879    +2387     
==========================================
+ Hits         3603     5581    +1978     
- Misses        600      881     +281     
- Partials      289      417     +128     

Flag	Coverage Δ
bare-k8s-integration	6.84% <0.00%> (?)
controllers-integration	72.89% <88.23%> (?)
envoygateway-integration	49.78% <0.00%> (?)
gatewayapi-integration	12.52% <0.00%> (?)
integration	?
istio-integration	53.74% <0.00%> (?)
unit	28.46% <0.00%> (-1.57%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components	Coverage Δ
api/v1beta1 (u)	84.61% <100.00%> (+13.18%)	⬆️
api/v1beta2 (u)	81.25% <75.17%> (-10.18%)	⬇️
pkg/common (u)	88.13% <ø> (-0.70%)	⬇️
pkg/istio (u)	70.95% <ø> (-2.96%)	⬇️
pkg/log (u)	94.73% <ø> (ø)
pkg/reconcilers (u)	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg/rlptools (u)	84.26% <ø> (+4.81%)	⬆️
controllers (i)	82.48% <80.83%> (+5.68%)	⬆️

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
controllers/dns_helper.go	92.30% <100.00%> (+8.32%)	⬆️
controllers/dnspolicy_dnsrecords.go	64.22% <84.00%> (-1.47%)	⬇️

... and 39 files with indirect coverage changes

[mikenairn]

The changes to use the builder looks good, but the change to the tests are unrelated and make me uncertain about possible regressions.

If you want to proceed with the proposed test changes I'd move them to a different PR so we can be sure the current tests all pass with the changes this PR is introducing.

[maksymvavilov]

The changes to use the builder looks good, but the change to the tests are unrelated and make me uncertain about possible regressions.

If you want to proceed with the proposed test changes I'd move them to a different PR so we can be sure the current tests all pass with the changes this PR is introducing.

Moved test changes into #882 so it could be discussed and closed or merged independently to this change

[mikenairn]

lgtm 👍