Allow custom writer configurations in IonSystemBuilder

[yvrng]

Description of changes:

These changes allow the user to set their own configurations for the IonTextWriterBuilder and IonBinaryWriterBuilder when using the IonSystemBuilder, bringing more flexibility.

Because this involved adding getters/setters, I had to update the SpotBugs baseline.xml file which was preventing the build from succeeding, and to fix a little bug in the Gradle configuration.

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.31%. Comparing base (3c1b6b1) to head (b1576f6).
Report is 26 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #781      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     67.23%   67.31%   +0.08%     
- Complexity     5484     5498      +14     
============================================
  Files           159      159              
  Lines         23025    23044      +19     
  Branches       4126     4124       -2     
============================================
+ Hits          15481    15513      +32     
+ Misses         6262     6254       -8     
+ Partials       1282     1277       -5     

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

[popematt]

Thanks for your contribution!

Let me first say that this is a good change, and we will merge this feature. However, there are a few implementation details that seem surprising to me. I understand why you did it that way—it looks like they are equivalent to the existing code for setting the reader builder—so I'm going to ask one of the other Ion maintainers to provide a second opinion here.

We might decide to merge this as is, change some of the behaviors before merging, or change the writer builder and reader builder options in a separate PR.

[zslayton]

Thanks for the contribution!

[popematt]

I've discussed this with @zslayton and @tgregg, and we agreed that some of the existing behavior is unexpected, but we're not sure yet what the impact would be on consumers if we changed it. We're going to merge this PR without addressing any of the issues with the existing behavior, and I've created #783 for us to follow up on that.