enhance: separate clients for yurt-manager

[luc99hen]

What type of PR is this?

/kind enhancement

What this PR does / why we need it:

Fix #2051

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

other Note

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 34 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 56.09%. Comparing base (3713163) to head (eb6cc42).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...roller/nodelifecycle/node_life_cycle_controller.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...r/controller/yurtappset/yurt_app_set_controller.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...roller/yurtappdaemon/yurt_app_daemon_controller.go	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
.../daemonpodupdater/daemon_pod_updater_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...et/loadbalancerset/load_balancer_set_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...r/raven/gatewaypickup/gateway_pickup_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...publicservice/gateway_public_service_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...dinator/delegatelease/delegate_lease_controller.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
.../controller/csrapprover/csr_approver_controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...er/controller/nodebucket/node_bucket_controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
... and 11 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2069      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.09%   56.09%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         186      186              
  Lines       18092    18090       -2     
==========================================
- Hits        10149    10147       -2     
  Misses       6910     6910              
  Partials     1033     1033              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	56.09% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[luc99hen]

@rambohe-ch I have found the root cause of the blocking e2e tests are there are no permission for controller-manager's cache building process. As we know, Cache is shared among all controllers/clients in the Manager level. And the process of building Cache need the full permissions from all clients.

Therefore, in our case we can still separate the permissions for each individual client, but the base client used by yurt-manager need the full permission at the initialization stage.

[luc99hen]

We can create a cache for each client used by individual controllers. However, I opt against this approach due to the escalating memory footprint.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
40 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[rambohe-ch]

/lgtm