Include generated files in repo

[johnstairs]

Changes in this pull request

Including the files that Yardl generates to the repo. Reasons for doing this:

1. Cloning the repo does not require running yardl generate before the repo can be used.
2. If there is a difference between the locally installed yardl version and the version that the repo expects, there can be unexpected behaviour.
3. When the version of yardl is updated, we'll be able to inspect the change the effect that it has to the generated code.

Of course, there will be more "noise" in the repo, but I think it is worth it.

Testing performed

Manual

Related issues

Checklist before requesting a review

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have added docstrings/doxygen in line with the guidance in the developer guide
• The code builds and runs on my machine

Contribution Notes

Please read and adhere to the contribution guidelines.

Please tick the following:

• The content of this Pull Request (the Contribution) is intentionally submitted for inclusion in the ETSI software (the Work) under the terms and conditions of the Apache-2.0 License.

[casperdcl]

IMO nobody is meant to clone this repo without running yardl generate. That's why we have distributions... (vis. #37 for discussion about how to dist cpp)

I wonder if 'tis worth pushing to a different repo/branch instead? Presumably though any generator (such as yardl) is meant to be robust enough to not need such testing in all downstream repos.

Also quick question - will future yardle generate invocations delete deprecated files?