Fix #386 Option to add .ignorePropery() to Csv builder

[djay-S]

Added new method CsvSchema.ignoreProperty() to define the properties that need to be removed for the csv.
Issue: #386

[djay-S]

Updated the feature branch with the latest code corrections from the base branch.

[cowtowncoder]

@djay-S I may be wrong, but I suspect this does not quite do what #386 is asking: I think it asks for something that would work similar to how @JsonIgnore works on POJO, but defined via schema. This PR on the other hand simply removes column definition which has other side effects.

But I hope @membersound can clarify details of how he thinks feature should work.

[djay-S]

@cowtowncoder I have made changes for not removing the column definitions and only ignoring the columns. Let me know if the changes are valid.

[membersound]

@djay-S I may be wrong, but I suspect this does not quite do what #386 is asking: I think it asks for something that would work similar to how @JsonIgnore works on POJO, but defined via schema. This PR on the other hand simply removes column definition which has other side effects.

But I hope @membersound can clarify details of how he thinks feature should work.

Exactly: I simply need a method that behaves like @JsonIgnore, but without having to tough the target bean codewise.

[cowtowncoder]

From naming perspective it should probably be "ignoreProperties".

Also, would perhaps make sense to take String... instead of String[] for convenience.

[cowtowncoder]

@djay-S My concern is whether this does what is being requested, and from @membersound 's comment I suspect it does not: removing column from CsvSchema is different from having column in schema but ignoring it for deserialization.
Tests just check that columns are removed from CsvSchema but not behavior wrt using such schema.
I assume behavior for removed columns will be "No such property" wrt deserialization.

@membersound you may be able to try this out by building 2.16.0-SNAPSHOT locally from this PR, in case you think this might work.

Leaving this open for now but may close in future unless it is thought to actually solve the problem.

[cowtowncoder]

I don't think this makes sense, closing.