Fix the circular initialization dependency #4658

[ministat]

Fix the issue #4658:

ModifierType and TypeDefinitionCategory has circular initialization dependency, as a result, if we access ModifierType before TypeDefinitionCategory, it will cause java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError problem.

A UT is included. No document change.

---

Thank you for contributing to JanusGraph!

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:

For all changes:

• Is there an issue associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the commit message?
• Does your PR body contain #xyz where xyz is the issue number you are trying to resolve?
• Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically master)?
• Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

For code changes:

• Have you written and/or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
• If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?
• If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE.txt file, including the main LICENSE.txt file in the root of this repository?
• If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE.txt file, including the main NOTICE.txt file found in the root of this repository?

For documentation related changes:

• Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered?

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ❌ The email address for the commit (17b7c84) is not linked to the GitHub account, preventing the EasyCLA check. Consult this Help Article and GitHub Help to resolve. (To view the commit's email address, add .patch at the end of this PR page's URL.) For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

[ministat]

My first commit missed the Signed-Off-By and email configuration, so I fixed it locally and updated the commit message. But I don't know how to fix the EasyCLA issue.
In addition, the CI failed case is about Hbase backend which failed to be launched, so it is not related to my CI. I think it needs to be rerun after EasyCLA issue was resolved.

[li-boxuan]

@ministat If you click on the "Details" link, does it give you an option to (re)sign the CLA?

[li-boxuan]

I just triggered a rerun of failed tests

[ministat]

Does the CLA expire? I signed CLA in 2022.

[ministat]

@ministat If you click on the "Details" link, does it give you an option to (re)sign the CLA?

Yes, it asked me to re-sign. I have signed again.

[li-boxuan]

@ministat If you click on the "Details" link, does it give you an option to (re)sign the CLA?

Yes, it asked me to re-sign. I have signed again.

The image is broken so I couldn't view it. I am guessing maybe we could try closing the issue and reopening again to trigger a rerun of EasyCLA.

[li-boxuan]

Hmm reopening doesn't help. Could you please try opening a dummy PR and see if it works in a new PR?

Also C.C. @FlorianHockmann - is this something we can escalate to LFAI & Data?

[FlorianHockmann]

Sure, the docs link to this JIRA for support issues.

I think only people from the Linux Foundation can inspect our signed CLAs. If we link this PR, then they should be able to check what's wrong here.

[ministat]

Let me close this PR and create a new one.

[ministat]

Recreate the PR to check whether can work around the EasyCLA issue.