Support Spring property placeholders in @WorkflowImpl workers attribute

[sachinsharma3191]

What was changed

Added environment.resolvePlaceholders(workerName) in three methods in WorkersTemplate.java:

• configureWorkflowImplementationsByWorkerName
• configureActivityBeansByWorkerName
• configureNexusServiceBeansByWorkerName

Why?

Issue #2747: the workers attribute in @WorkflowImpl, @ActivityImpl, and @NexusServiceImpl did not resolve Spring property placeholders like ${my.worker.name}. The taskQueues attribute already resolves placeholders, so this makes workers consistent.

Checklist

• Added resolvePlaceholders call in all three methods
• Consistent with existing taskQueues placeholder resolution pattern

Fixes #2747

[dplyukhin]

Thanks for the contrib. Is this PR still in progress? The checklist isn't checked off. If in progress, please convert to a draft PR. Please also update the PR description to use the template we provide. Please also take note of the contributing guidelines - particularly AI-generated PRs. Please make sure to review AI contributions thoroughly yourself before opening a PR.

[sachinsharma3191]

Thanks for the review! I've updated the PR description to use the repo's template format and checked off the checklist.

This addresses issue #2747 — adds resolvePlaceholders for the workers attribute, making it consistent with the existing taskQueues resolution. I've reviewed the change thoroughly.

[Quinn-With-Two-Ns]

If this PR add some new feature or capability please also add test verifying any new feature or behaviour

[sachinsharma3191]

@Quinn-With-Two-Ns Added a test in cf8b6bc8:

• New test class AutoDiscoveryByWorkerNameResolverTest verifies that @WorkflowImpl(workers = "${worker.name}") and @ActivityImpl(workers = "${worker.name}") correctly resolve Spring property placeholders at registration time.
• Follows the same pattern as AutoDiscoveryByTaskQueueResolverTest which tests the equivalent taskQueues resolution.
• Test passes locally.

@dplyukhin Could you review this PR along with #2992 and #2993 when you get a chance? All three are ready for review. Thanks!

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.

---

sachinsharma seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}