[AzureMonitorDistro] resync vendored code

[TimothyMothra]

Follow up to #42479 (comment)

Because we've been manually syncing vendored files, some of these files are out of sync with the OpenTelemetry repo. I've resynced all files.

Explanation of Changes

• removed // <copyright file="FILENAME" company="OpenTelemetry Authors"> from all vendored files.
  This was a mistake made when manually syncing files.
• revert class name SqlClient_TracerProviderBuilderExtensions. The "SqlClient_" prefix was necessary when we had multiple vendored instrumentation libraries with identical class names/namespaces. This is no longer needed.

Steps followed to Sync Vendored code

1. Create a New Branch in azure-sdk-for-net repo. This is where changes will be committed.
2. Sync OpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.SqlClient
   2a. Clone the OpenTelemetry.NET Repository

   git clone https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-dotnet.git

   2b. Fetch the tags and checkout the most recent release

   git fetch --tags
   git checkout tags/Instrumentation.SqlClient-1.7.0-beta.1

   2c. Copy the following folders into Azure.Monitor.OpenTelemetry.AspNetCore's Vendoring directory:
   • OpenTelemetry.Instrumentation.SqlClient
     • Remove the following files:
       • *.csproj
       • README.md
       • CHANGELOG.MD
       • AssemblyInfo.cs
   • Shared
     • Specifically copy these files:
       • DiagnosticSourceInstrumentation\DiagnosticSourceListener.cs
       • DiagnosticSourceInstrumentation\DiagnosticSourceSubscriber.cs
       • DiagnosticSourceInstrumentation\ListenerHandler.cs
       • DiagnosticSourceInstrumentation\PropertyFetcher.cs
       • Shims\IsExternalInit.cs
       • Shims\NullableAttributes.cs
       • ExceptionExtensions.cs
       • Guard.cs
       • ResourceSemanticConventions.cs
       • SemanticConventions.cs
       • SpanAttributeConstants.cs
3. Sync OpenTelemetry.ResourceDetectors.Azure
   3a. Clone the OpenTelemetry.NET Contrib Repository

   git clone https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-dotnet-contrib.git

   3b. Fetch the tags and checkout the most recent release

   git fetch --tags
   git checkout tags/ResourceDetectors.Azure-1.0.0-beta.5

   3c. Copy the following folders into the Azure.Monitor.OpenTelemetry.AspNetCore's Vendoring directory:
   • OpenTelemetry.ResourceDetectors.Azure
     • Remove the following files:
       • *.csproj
       • README.md
       • CHANGELOG.MD
       • AssemblyInfo.cs
   • Shared
     • Must do a file comparison to confirm there are no missing changes or conflicts between the two repos.
4. Additional Changes
   • Modified all instrumentation public APIs to internal.
   • Added #nullable enable to OpenTelemetry.ResourceDetoctors.Azure files. Our Azure.Monitor.OpenTelemetry.AspNetCore project does not yet support nullables.
   • Added #pragma warning disable AZC0102 and AZC0104 to Azure.VmMetaDataRequestor.cs. These are code standards that only exist in this Azure SDK reop.

[azure-sdk]

API change check

API changes are not detected in this pull request.

[reyang]

When syncing file updates, there was some confusion on our end about what copyright should be. I re-reviewed our conversation with CELA, and their instruction was to copy the copyright as-is.

I don't think that's the right way to think about this issue. The right model IMHO is #42479 (comment)

[TimothyMothra]

When syncing file updates, there was some confusion on our end about what copyright should be. I re-reviewed our conversation with CELA, and their instruction was to copy the copyright as-is.

I don't think that's the right way to think about this issue. The right model IMHO is #42479 (comment)

@reyang please re-review. I resynced the files using the model discussed. I've updated this PR and the description.

[reyang]

When syncing file updates, there was some confusion on our end about what copyright should be. I re-reviewed our conversation with CELA, and their instruction was to copy the copyright as-is.

I don't think that's the right way to think about this issue. The right model IMHO is #42479 (comment)

@reyang please re-review. I resynced the files using the model discussed. I've updated this PR and the description.

The description/approach looks good to me, Thanks! Don't get blocked on me (I don't plan to spend time to compare files and approve the PR).

[rajkumar-rangaraj]

LGTM.
Please have Vishwesh review the PR before the merge.

[vishweshbankwar]

LGTM