CORE-15909: make CurrentGroupParametersLookup public api

[jennyang-r3]

This PR introduces a new public api for CurrentGroupParametersService that will allow users access to GroupParameters

[corda-jenkins-ci02]

Jenkins build for PR 1202 build 24

Build Successful:
Jar artifact version produced by this PR: 5.1.0.16-alpha-1692879578824

[charlieR3]

LGTM

[lankydan]

Leaving this as a note to myself, so don't worry about it for now.

Should group parameters be available for the consensual ledger as well? If the answer is yes, then GroupParametersLookup should either live in the membership module or the ledger-common module.

There is an argument it should be in the membership module regardless.

[lankydan]

@blsemo @dimosr @charlieR3 let me know if you have any thoughts.

[vlajos]

I think adding anything to Consensual Ledger is a product question.
And as I heard, Consensual ledger is not one of the top priorities.
On the other hand, this module does not have anything UTXO-specific.
Also, future ledger modules may need it.

[lankydan]

Yeah, that's my thinking as well.

[lankydan]

Potentially this should actually go into application along side the MemberLookup interface.

[charlieR3]

Yes, I think it could fit in application with the MemberLookup interface. The GroupParameters interface is in the membership module already.

Saying that though, the NotaryInfo interface is in membership but NotaryLookup is in ledger-common. I think NotaryInfo is mainly in membership though because GroupParameters depends on it and we don't want membership to depend on ledger.

I would lean towards having it in membership so that it is not ledger specific. We allow adding any custom metadata into to group parameters for example which doesn't necessarily need to be ledger specific.

[lankydan]

Maybe we should consider moving NotaryLookup too (we'd have to deprecate the existing one and copy it to application/membership).

I think feels like the right fit for GroupParametersLookup and possibly NotaryLookup.

Happy to go with the majority on this.

[charlieR3]

The original logic for NotaryLookup being in ledger-common was that it's tightly linked with the ledger layer so it seems like a better place for it. But not sure that matters much if NotaryInfo is in membership anyway. membership is a bit of a cross layer concept anyway so I'm happy to go with the majority also.

[vlajos]

I would handle NotaryLookup in a separate ticket.
But I would move GroupParametersLookup to the most future-proof place in this one.
(However, I am not too sure whether application or membership is the best.)

[lankydan]

Lets move GroupParametersLookup to v5.application.membership. We can raise a tech debt for NotaryLookup, ideally to be reviewed before 5.1. Then we can decide if they should all move to the membership module or if they all live in v5.application.membership.

[blsemo]

LGTM