feat: Add OpenSearch module

[digital88]

What does this PR do?

Adds OpenSearch testcontainers implementation.

Why is it important?

Currently there is no OpenSearch testcontainers implementation.

Related issues

Hopefully closes #1137

How to test this PR

tests/Testcontainers.OpenSearch.Tests

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for testcontainers-dotnet ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	1a4e120
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/testcontainers-dotnet/deploys/683f58d834a1960008707e13
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1395--testcontainers-dotnet.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[digital88]

@HofmeisterAn Hello, please take a look.

[digital88]

I think this is ready for review

[HofmeisterAn]

Thanks for updating. I'll review it in the next days.

[HofmeisterAn]

Thanks for the PR! I finally had a time to review it. Overall, it looks good. I made a few adjustments for alignment and changed how the wait strategy is configured.

If we configure it using WithDisabledSecurity(bool), the order of method calls starts to matter, which we generally try to avoid. For example, if a user calls WithPassword(string) afterward, the readiness check will fail.

In cases where builder APIs have dependencies like this, we either use a dedicated method to handle it or apply the final configuration in Build().

I still need to review the tests tomorrow. If you're okay with the changes I made, we can go ahead and merge it then.

[digital88]

Thanks for the PR! I finally had a time to review it. Overall, it looks good. I made a few adjustments for alignment and changed how the wait strategy is configured.

If we configure it using WithDisabledSecurity(bool), the order of method calls starts to matter, which we generally try to avoid. For example, if a user calls WithPassword(string) afterward, the readiness check will fail.

In cases where builder APIs have dependencies like this, we either use a dedicated method to handle it or apply the final configuration in Build().

I still need to review the tests tomorrow. If you're okay with the changes I made, we can go ahead and merge it then.

Hello. Thanks for review. Overall all changes look good, I appreciate you taking time to do it.

[HofmeisterAn]

Thanks for the contribution 🙇.