[FLINK-40163] [ci] Add new baseline nightly build to Github Actions

[dalelane]

What is the purpose of the change

Azure's nightly stage in tools/azure-pipelines/build-apache-repo.yml has cron_azure as a default baseline build, but there is no equivalent build in the Github Actions scheduled nightly pipeline.

The goal of this commit is to update the GHA nightly release pipeline towards parity with the AZP implementation, treating it as a reference.

Brief change log

Added new Java 17 job to the GHA nightly release pipeline

Verifying this change

Manually triggered the Github Actions pipeline in my own fork.

(see dalelane#3 )

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

• Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
• The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
• The serializers: no
• The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
• Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: no
• The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
• If yes, how is the feature documented? not applicable

---

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

no

[flinkbot]

CI report:

• 6e15bfe Azure: SUCCESS

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[snuyanzin]

@dalelane can you please explain why do we need it?
We already have java17 in default ci for merged PRs

[snuyanzin]

The reason I'm asking is that we have a limited resource for GHA
and Apache infra has already complained that we use too much, see for more details https://lists.apache.org/thread/jn9t7qjj4wlz98t1ddqxwypcn6g7wrds

now if we add this it will be added to master and release branches (supported)

[dalelane]

@snuyanzin The (admittedly over-long!) background is in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-27075?focusedCommentId=18095329&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-18095329

The TLDR is that (given the overall objective to get the GHA pipelines to a point where they could be a viable replacement for the Azure pipelines) I looked to see where there were things done in the AZP pipeline with no equivalent in the GHA pipeline. The goal was parity, rather than coming at this from first principles to decide if it's needed in it's own right.

It's obviously entirely valid to take a step back and decide on whether it's needed, rather than just blindly copying it across (which, to be fair, @XComp did highlight in dalelane#3 (review) ) but I lack the context to have a strong opinion on that. I'm open to a steer from you and @XComp on what would be sensible.

[davidradl]

why is this -Dflink.hadoop.version=2.10.2 but java 11 and 21 are -Dinclude_hadoop_aws