Runnable new-and-enhanced JS samples directory for v3

[hossam-nasr]

This PR tackles a few issues, mainly resolves #421, but it also addresses #357, #356, and partially #276. Also provides good scaffolding for #394. This PR migrates the old samples and adds a new, runnable, new programming model v3-compatible samples-js directory. This PR is only for the JS samples, but I will create another one for another, separate TS directory. I also will delete the existing samples directory in a separate PR. In addition, this PR:

• Renames functions to be simpler and more node idiomatic
• Updates/replaces outdated/maintenance/deprecated packages used in the samples, such as moment (replaced with luxon), request (replaced with axios), and the deprecated wunderground weather API (replaced with OpenWeatherMap API), and maybe others
• Leverages the ability to have multiple functions in the sample file to group related samples together

I tested all the samples manually and verified that they all work, with some notable exceptions:

• The smsPhoneVerification sample -- this revealed an issue on the framework level with activities having extra output bindings -- issue here: Better handle return value when not set by a binding azure-functions-nodejs-library#53 to track
• The sayHelloWithSubOrchestrator sample -- there is an issue with added double quotes -- issue here Double quotes added to input passed from suborchestrator to activity #436 to track
• The shoppingEntity/shoppingOrchestration samples -- entities don't support non-JSON serializable states -- issue here Entities do not support non-JSON serializable states #437 to track
• The unit testing sample -- I didn't migrate this one because there currently isn't a good unit testing story for the new prog model -- issue already here Improve user unit testing story in v3 #420 to track
• The listAzureSubscriptions sample -- I couldn't test this locally

Ofc, any design/organization/naming choices made here are subject to discussion :)

[davidmrdavid]

Leaving some preliminary comments. Thank you for this PR

[ejizba]

Approving the overall structure of this PR. I skimmed the code, but don't feel the samples directory is worth a detailed review from me personally. As mentioned offline, my favorite thing about this PR is that it got you to test a lot of scenarios 🙂 Good work!

[davidmrdavid]

LGTM, although it seems you have some merge conflicts to resolve. Still, the contents of this PR seem good to me.