feat(example): Allow configuring some parameters with env variables

[lanseg]

This change allows to load users from the json file.

That should help to create better test scenarios when using example server as fake Zitadel instance for testing. For example, having several users with different permissions or presence in the internal base (known user, unknown user, blocked user, etc).

We don't need dynamic server for testing, but I could update it to make env variables unified if needed.

This is an extended version of another pull request: #656, which was deleted by mistake.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.02%. Comparing base (0992c5f) to head (526b6bd).
Report is 99 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #663      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.06%   61.02%   +0.96%     
==========================================
  Files          80       81       +1     
  Lines        6998     7418     +420     
==========================================
+ Hits         4203     4527     +324     
- Misses       2498     2581      +83     
- Partials      297      310      +13     

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

[muhlemmer]

Hi @lanseg I noticed you pushed another commit with additional changes after the initial review was done, not related to the review comments. Although I do not have a problem with the additional change, this is not a nice netiquette. If you intent to continue work on a PR, it should be marked as "draft" and not "ready for review". Please keep that in mind for future contributions to any github project.

You also have introduced a build error that needs to be fixed.

I'll mark this as draft for the moment and please mark it ready for review once you are done.

[lanseg]

Hi @lanseg I noticed you pushed another commit with additional changes after the initial review was done, not related to the review comments. Although I do not have a problem with the additional change, this is not a nice netiquette. If you intent to continue work on a PR, it should be marked as "draft" and not "ready for review". Please keep that in mind for future contributions to any github project.

You also have introduced a build error that needs to be fixed.

I'll mark this as draft for the moment and please mark it ready for review once you are done.

I'm very sorry for causing a mess, github workflow confused me a bit better.