Add E2E test verifying OTEL tracing across Zenko services

[delthas]

Summary

• Deploy Jaeger all-in-one (memory-only, OTLP-enabled, pinned to 1.76.0)
  in the kind CI cluster alongside existing dependencies (Keycloak,
  Prometheus, etc.)
• Enable tracing on the Zenko CR (spec.tracing, ratio "0") so the
  cluster runs in production-mode (no ambient traces); the test sends
  a single PUT carrying a W3C traceparent header through a port-forward
  that bypasses nginx (which strips traceparent). Cloudserver's
  parent-based sampler honors the header → only that one request is
  traced.
• Add a @PreMerge CTST scenario that asserts the trace is present in
  Jaeger and contains spans from both connector-cloudserver and
  connector-vault

What changed

File	What
solution/deps.yaml	Bump vault 8.11.6 → 8.11.7 (OTEL support) and cloudserver 9.3.9 → 9.4.0-preview.1 (OTEL support, parent-based sampler)
configs/zenko.yaml	Add spec.tracing (enabled, ratio "0", jaeger endpoint)
configs/jaeger.yaml	Jaeger Deployment + Service (pinned 1.76.0, memory-only, requests/limits)
install-kind-dependencies.sh	kubectl apply -f configs/jaeger.yaml
setup-e2e-env.sh	Port-forward for svc/${ZENKO_NAME}-connector-cloudserver:8000 + JaegerQueryEndpoint / InternalCloudserverEndpoint in world params
world/Zenko.ts	World parameter types for the two new endpoints
features/otel-tracing.feature	New @PreMerge scenario
steps/otel-tracing.ts	Generates W3C traceparent, signs PUT via SDK middleware injecting the header, polls GET /api/traces/<id> until the trace appears, asserts cloudserver + vault spans

Why

Parent ticket OS-1072
tracks adding OpenTelemetry tracing across the Zenko stack. This PR
adds CI coverage to verify that traces actually propagate end-to-end
(cloudserver → vault) once tracing is enabled.

Issue: ZENKO-5258

[bert-e]

Hello delthas,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options

name	description	privileged	authored
/after_pull_request	Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval	Bypass the pull request author's approval	⭐
/bypass_build_status	Bypass the build and test status	⭐
/bypass_commit_size	Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA	⭐
/bypass_incompatible_branch	Bypass the check on the source branch prefix	⭐
/bypass_jira_check	Bypass the Jira issue check	⭐
/bypass_peer_approval	Bypass the pull request peers' approval	⭐
/bypass_leader_approval	Bypass the pull request leaders' approval	⭐
/approve	Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request.		✍️
/create_pull_requests	Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches	Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus	Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity	Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait	Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.

Available commands

name	description	privileged
/help	Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status	Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear	Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry	Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build	Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset	Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset	Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

[bert-e]

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

• the author

• 2 peers

[bert-e]

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

• the author

• 2 peers

[francoisferrand]

overall not sure where to stand here: there is a fundamental compromise: do we want to test the "production" case first and foremost (i.e. without tracing), or is it safe-enough to enable Otel all the time (i.e. not testing production anymore, which could hide crashes or introduce subtle delays...)

[SylvainSenechal]

side question, here the jaeger server will be killed at the end the ci run, but would it be possible to have the traces data retained, so that maybe we could export these traces data in the artifact, and spin up a server to explore them with a ui ?

[delthas]

Moved to a ratio of 0% (no traces, but enabled); and injecting a forcefully enabled trace using a traceparent header directly made against cloudserver (bypassing the Ingress that strips it)

This should bring no performance overhead, no overlay reconfiguration, and nicely isolate our test trace.

[bert-e]

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

• the author

• 2 peers

[claude]

9.4.0-preview.1 is a pre-release tag. deps.yaml defines the component versions for the solution — the review criteria require pinning to a concrete released tag or content hash. If this PR is meant to land only after cloudserver 9.4.0 ships, consider gating the merge on that release and updating the tag then. If the preview tag is intentional for CI validation, document that constraint so it isn't accidentally shipped.