Preserve input instance order in zone_based stoppable check

[LZD-PratyushBhatt]

Issues

• My PR addresses the following Helix issues and references them in the PR description:

(#200 - Link your issue number here: You can write "Fixes #XXX". Please use the proper keyword so that the issue gets closed automatically. See https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue
Any of the following keywords can be used: close, closes, closed, fix, fixes, fixed, resolve, resolves, resolved)
This PR fixes #3028 Preserve input instance order in zone_based stoppable checks.

Description

• Here are some details about my PR, including screenshots of any UI changes:

(Write a concise description including what, why, how)

1. This PR is targetting zone-based stoppable check for now.
2. The current behavior of stoppable check is that in case of ties where we can stop any of the instances, the stoppable check stops the lexicographically smaller one, which is not a predictable behavior.
3. This PR introduces a way for stoppable check to preserve the input order passed by the client. It adds a flag preserveOrder which helps maintain backward compatibility for clients that might be relying on earlier behavior.

Tests

• The following tests are written for this issue:

(List the names of added unit/integration tests)
testMultipleReplicasInSameMZWithPreserveOrder is added.

• The following is the result of the "mvn test" command on the appropriate module:

(If CI test fails due to known issue, please specify the issue and test PR locally. Then copy & paste the result of "mvn test" to here.)

Changes that Break Backward Compatibility (Optional)

• My PR contains changes that break backward compatibility or previous assumptions for certain methods or API. They include:

(Consider including all behavior changes for public methods or API. Also include these changes in merge description so that other developers are aware of these changes. This allows them to make relevant code changes in feature branches accounting for the new method/API behavior.)

Documentation (Optional)

• In case of new functionality, my PR adds documentation in the following wiki page:

(Link the GitHub wiki you added)

Commits

• My commits all reference appropriate Apache Helix GitHub issues in their subject lines. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
  1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
  2. Subject is limited to 50 characters (not including Jira issue reference)
  3. Subject does not end with a period
  4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
  5. Body wraps at 72 characters
  6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

Code Quality

• My diff has been formatted using helix-style.xml
  (helix-style-intellij.xml if IntelliJ IDE is used)

[LZD-PratyushBhatt]

Hi @junkaixue,
Thanks for the review! I've addressed the comments, whenever you get a chance, could you please take another look?
Appreciate your time, thanks!

[LZD-PratyushBhatt]

Triggered CI in my fork as well, a single test failure, but that seems unrelated.
https://github.com/LZD-PratyushBhatt/helix/actions/runs/15035469614/job/42262950890