Refactor introduce recording storage

[betaboon]

as discussed here an implementation for a dedicated request-recorder class.

[betaboon]

also included a small fix in the ci-configuration which led to an ugly space in the ci-status :P

[coveralls]

coverage: 98.682% (-0.3%) from 99.025%
when pulling f3872d6 on betaboon:refactor-introduce-recording-storage
into a5b5e34 on mindflayer:main.

[coveralls]

coverage: 98.682% (-0.3%) from 99.025%
when pulling 1ba5b07 on betaboon:refactor-introduce-recording-storage
into a5b5e34 on mindflayer:main.

[mindflayer]

Could you please sort out the three FIXMEs? I am still reviewing it, but I don't see anything serious.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[mindflayer]

Amazing job, @betaboon, many thanks!

[betaboon]

@mindflayer I'm currently working on doing the last thing that i mentioned:

refactoring Entry, Request, Response.

until that is done i would hold of from instructing people to replace the recorder-class (as in those other PRs)

maybe we should somehow make the replacing of recorder-class a public api when we're ready?

[mindflayer]

maybe we should somehow make the replacing of recorder-class a public api when we're ready?

Getter/setter on top of _record_storage, a test, and a few lines of documentation, would do the trick.