feat(oidc): email claim configuration

[karatkep]

What does this PR do?

This is a continuation of improvements to deploy Che on Azure AKS in a way that after we taught Che to leverage access_token instead of id_token to access AKS, we need to able to configure email's claim's name (hardcoded to email and cannot be changed in current version) in Che-server.

This PR adds support of CHE_OIDC_EMAIL__CLAIM to configure email's claim's name:

spec:
  components:
    cheServer:
      extraProperties:
        CHE_OIDC_EMAIL__CLAIM: unique_name

Screenshot/screencast of this PR

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

eclipse-che/che#21515

How to test this PR?

I have just tested this change on Azure AKS integrated with Azure AD.
Che-server image: docker.io/karatkep/che-server:21515-email-claim-configuration
CheCluster patch:

spec:
  networking:
    auth:
      identityProviderURL: https://sts.windows.net/{TENANT_ID}/v2.0/
      identityToken: access_token
      oAuthClientName: {CLIENT_ID}
      oAuthSecret: {CLIENT_SECRET}
      oAuthScope: openid email profile 6dae42f8-4368-4678-94ff-3960e28e3630/.default
  components:
    cheServer:
      extraProperties:
        CHE_OIDC_AUTH__SERVER__URL: https://sts.windows.net/{TENANT_ID}/v2.0/
        CHE_OIDC_EMAIL__CLAIM: unique_name

chectl command to deploy:

chectl server:deploy --platform=k8s --installer=operator \
--cheimage=docker.io/karatkep/che-server:21515-email-claim-configuration \
--skip-oidc-provider-check \
--skip-cert-manager \
--che-operator-cr-patch-yaml=che.yml

PR Checklist

As the author of this Pull Request I made sure that:

• The Eclipse Contributor Agreement is valid
• Code produced is complete
• Code builds without errors
• Tests are covering the bugfix
• The repository devfile is up to date and works
• Sections What issues does this PR fix or reference and How to test this PR completed
• Relevant user documentation updated
• Relevant contributing documentation updated
• CI/CD changes implemented, documented and communicated

Reviewers

Reviewers, please comment how you tested the PR when approving it.

[sparkoo]

lgtm. I haven't tested it.