Mandate Enforcer availability for the Router

[pubudu538]

Purpose

Fixes #2207

This mandates Enforcers availability when checking the readiness of the Router. Earlier, Router starts accepting requests without considering the availability of the Enforcer.

Goals

Describe the solutions that this feature/fix will introduce to resolve the problems described above

Approach

Describe how you are implementing the solutions. Include an animated GIF or screenshot if the change affects the UI (email documentation@wso2.com to review all UI text). Include a link to a Markdown file or Google doc if the feature write-up is too long to paste here.

User stories

Summary of user stories addressed by this change>

Release note

Brief description of the new feature or bug fix as it will appear in the release notes

Documentation

Link(s) to product documentation that addresses the changes of this PR. If no doc impact, enter “N/A” plus brief explanation of why there’s no doc impact

Training

Link to the PR for changes to the training content in https://github.com/wso2/WSO2-Training, if applicable

Certification

Type “Sent” when you have provided new/updated certification questions, plus four answers for each question (correct answer highlighted in bold), based on this change. Certification questions/answers should be sent to certification@wso2.com and NOT pasted in this PR. If there is no impact on certification exams, type “N/A” and explain why.

Marketing

Link to drafts of marketing content that will describe and promote this feature, including product page changes, technical articles, blog posts, videos, etc., if applicable

Automation tests

• Unit tests

  Code coverage information

• Integration tests

  Details about the test cases and coverage

Security checks

• Followed secure coding standards in http://wso2.com/technical-reports/wso2-secure-engineering-guidelines? yes/no
• Ran FindSecurityBugs plugin and verified report? yes/no
• Confirmed that this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets? yes/no

Samples

Provide high-level details about the samples related to this feature

Related PRs

List any other related PRs

Migrations (if applicable)

Describe migration steps and platforms on which migration has been tested

Test environment

List all JDK versions, operating systems, databases, and browser/versions on which this feature/fix was tested

Learning

Describe the research phase and any blog posts, patterns, libraries, or add-ons you used to solve the problem.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 27.79%. Comparing base (ae75260) to head (2b32250).
Report is 41 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2213      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   25.56%   27.79%   +2.22%     
==========================================
  Files          47      124      +77     
  Lines        9394    14674    +5280     
  Branches        0     2681    +2681     
==========================================
+ Hits         2402     4078    +1676     
- Misses       6861    10465    +3604     
  Partials      131      131              

Flag	Coverage Δ
adapter	27.38% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
common-controller	4.07% <ø> (ø)
config-deployer-service	25.99% <ø> (?)
idp-domain-service	80.21% <ø> (?)

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

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