fix(cli): fix ecs hotswap deployment waiting conditions

[tomwwright]

Closes #27882. See linked issue for further details.

Changes 📝

• Add integration tests for hotswap deployments for ECS
  • Test that ECS hotswap works
  • Test that ECS hotswap waits for the deployment to complete successfully
  • Test that ECS hotswap detects deployment failure
• Fix custom waiter expression to match on rolloutState instead of task counts
  • Provide backup waiter that doesn't rely on rolloutState to support other deployment types
• Fix custom waiter expression to detect failed deployments

Availability of rolloutState property ⚠️

Notably the documentation describes that rolloutState is only provided for services using the rolling update.

Relying on rolloutState would effectively exclude ECS Service hotswap deployment support for other deployment types. To avoid this, I've opted to match for success on the presence of a single deployment -- my observation of the deployment state (see linked issue) makes me feel this will suffice.

Note there is no test added for other deployment types

Support for failed deployments using rolloutState ⛔

The rolloutState property is used to detect failure if it is present -- this means that non-rolling update ecs services will be unable to detect failure (parity with where we were before anyway)

I've added tests and another waiter condition so that hotswap deployments detect that the deployment has failed. At this stage the error message for this is a bit obtuse -- I figure someone can improve the message in a follow-up PR if users find it confusing. Example:

✨ hotswapping resources:
  ✨ ECS Task Definition 'cdktest0l5zgdtshw5ecshotswaptaskdefinition6E807351'
  ✨ ECS Service 'cdktest-0l5zgdtshw5-ecs-hotswap-serviceService7DDC3B7C-TJs6rF3ur3Og'
      
❌  cdktest-0l5zgdtshw5-ecs-hotswap failed: ResourceNotReady: Resource is not in the state deploymentCompleted

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.

A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.

[tomwwright]

Exemption Request Fix is for CLI so snapshots are not relevant

When possible may I please have integration tests run on this PR? Thank you 🙇

[aws-cdk-automation]

This PR has been in the CHANGES REQUESTED state for 3 weeks, and looks abandoned. To keep this PR from being closed, please continue work on it. If not, it will automatically be closed in a week.

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: ad6d8c9
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[aws-cdk-automation]

This PR has been deemed to be abandoned, and will be automatically closed. Please create a new PR for these changes if you think this decision has been made in error.

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter fails with the following errors:

❌ Fixes must contain a change to an integration test file and the resulting snapshot.
❌ CLI code has changed. A maintainer must run the code through the testing pipeline (git fetch origin pull/27943/head && git push -f origin FETCH_HEAD:test-main-pipeline), then add the 'pr-linter/cli-integ-tested' label when the pipeline succeeds.

PRs must pass status checks before we can provide a meaningful review.

If you would like to request an exemption from the status checks or clarification on feedback, please leave a comment on this PR containing Exemption Request and/or Clarification Request.

[tomwwright]

Can I please get this re-opened? It is not an abandoned PR as evidenced by the recent updates. If possible, I would prefer to avoid creating a new PR, to avoid the noise/effort as well as the fact it appears PRs are being handled roughly in creation order