feat: port Ubuntu versioning support to Debian container images

[pando85]

Resolves #27862.

Changes

Added support for dated container image version formats in Debian versioning, similar to existing Ubuntu support. This includes parsing, validation, stability checks, and comparison logic for versions like bookworm-20230816 and bullseye-20220101.2.

Key changes:

• Updated isDatedCodeName to validate codenames against Debian distro info
• Enhanced DebianVersioningApi with dated version handling in isValid, isStable, _parse, equals, and isGreaterThan
• Added comprehensive unit tests for dated version functionality

Context

Please select one of the following:

• This closes an existing Issue, Closes: Implement support of "<codename>-<date>" version format for Debian docker images #27862.
• This doesn't close an Issue, but I accept the risk that this PR may be closed if maintainers disagree with its opening or implementation

AI assistance disclosure

Did you use AI tools to create any part of this pull request?

Please select one option and, if yes, briefly describe how AI was used (e.g., code, tests, docs) and which tool(s) you used.

• No — I did not use AI for this contribution.
• Yes — minimal assistance (e.g., IDE autocomplete, small code completions, grammar fixes).
• Yes — substantive assistance (AI-generated non‑trivial portions of code, tests, or documentation).
• [] Yes — other (please describe):

Documentation (please check one with an [x])

• I have updated the documentation, or
• [] No documentation update is required

How I've tested my work (please select one)

I have verified these changes via:

• Code inspection only, or
• Newly added/modified unit tests, or
• No unit tests, but ran on a real repository, or
• Both unit tests + ran on a real repository

The public repository: N/A (local development)

[viceice]

missing coverage

[pando85]

I added a small test to cover the two lines that were missing. It should be ready to merge now.

[pando85]

Finally, all green. Ping @viceice

[RahulGautamSingh]

here we return the codename but in the previous isDatedCodename we return false for buster-20220101.123..why this difference ?

[pando85]

I don't fully understand your question.
buster-20220101.123 doesn't match the regex /^(?<codename>\w+)-(?<date>\d{8})(?<suffix>\.\d{1,2})?$/ so it returns false and null. On the other hand, bookworm-20230816.1 matches and it returns true and bookworm.