Reduce loglevel for non-annotated java methods in rule classes

[seime]

As mentioned on forum https://community.openhab.org/t/jrule-openhab-rules-using-java/121441/133

Myself I also have a hundred non-rule java methods that create a lot of (masquerading) noise in the logs on rule reloading.

[querdenker2k]

maybe we can completely remove the logging for lambda methods?
i am a little bit stressed of this warnings as well

[seime]

I think it is good to have some debug logging to look at when things are not working as expected.

[querdenker2k]

of course, but its not possible to annotate lambda methods and when i am searching for problems why some rules are not executed i often see some lambda methods which are not annotated. For me it's a little bit confusing.
But when you don't think so i will accept the MR.

[seime]

The code I find hardest to debug is chained lamba expressions with no logging at all.
Thus useful logging that contains some context data is to me crucial.

Maybe I do not understand what you mean?

[querdenker2k]

I have a lot of these messages while starting (or updading a rule)
[JRuleEngine] Skipping method lambda$chargeCar$2 on class org.openhab.automation.jrule.rules.user.Car since JRuleName annotation is missing
and this is the lambda

var usingAmpere = availablePower
                .map(aDouble -> aDouble + ALLOWED_EXTRA_POWER)
                .map(this::calculateMaxAmpere);

and just the lambda can never be an JRule triggered rule and would therefor never had JRule annotations.

[seime]

Yes, this PR just changes the log level from warn to debug.
I can live without this specific log statement if you instead like to remove it.

[querdenker2k]

@seime all right, i will create a new pr for this