feat(bindings): Add hyper compatibility crate

[goatgoose]

Resolved issues:

Part of #4618

Description of changes:

Adds a new s2n-tls-hyper crate to provide compatibility with hyper clients.

This crate makes it easier to use s2n-tls as the TLS provider in hyper by exposing an HttpsConnector struct that implements tower_service::Service, allowing for it to be provided to the hyper client builder.

This crate is based on similar crates that provide hyper compatibility to TLS implementations, such as to rustls, via hyper-rustls, and native-tls, via hyper-tls.

Call-outs:

• The MaybeHttpsStream is currently definitely an https stream, but exists as an enum so it can later be configured to use TCP without TLS.
• There currently isn't any purpose for the HttpsConnector Builder, but I intend to add at least one option to it later.

Testing:

I added a simple get request test just to check that the HttpsConnector seems to be working, but I plan to add more sophisticated tests in another PR.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[jmayclin]

My default inclination, especially for public crates, is to be as generous as possible with the documentation. I think that's especially useful since we (s2n-tls maintainers) don't spent that much time in the HTTP domain.

Along those lines I think that we should generally have doc comments for essentially every public struct. "What is it, what does it do, and when is it used?" Are useful points to start with.

[goatgoose]

I was getting link errors when building the new doc tests with AWS-LC-FIPS:
https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls/actions/runs/9646640129/job/26603549106?pr=4617

It seems like this is related to this issue: rust-lang/cargo#8531. AWS-LC works around this issue by disabling doc tests when testing FIPS, so I did this as well.

[jmayclin]

I'm happy with the way that this is looking. We'll probably end up slightly shifting things as development goes along, but this looks like a good foundation.

Edit: Actually forgot about my struct/bound comment. Would like that addressed before approving, but I don't see a way to revoke my approval, lol