[Proposal] Use unboxed boolean types in ResourceHandlerRequest

There are 2 recent changes that landed in `ResourceHandlerRequest`: https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cloudformation-cli-java-plugin/commit/ebca1dc12e187b484ed599db65d726a6b23a14c0#diff-adfb207dac8dff5107b68b36280ccad4525f92176184ad2ffff9aa7e591b2e8a and https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cloudformation-cli-java-plugin/commit/e34f0472d0bc67953f41d4ceb666a175d0a7fb2d#diff-adfb207dac8dff5107b68b36280ccad4525f92176184ad2ffff9aa7e591b2e8a.

Both changes favor boxed Boolean over primitive types.

As a result, the usage of this class implies on importing BooleanUtils or a similar helper in order to avoid constructions like: `if (request.getSnapshotRequested() != null && request.getSnapshotRequested() == true) { ... }`.

And the code that is performing a "naive" boolean comparison like: `if (request.getSnapshotRequested()) { ... }` will fail with a null-pointer exception.

The same stands for the rollback flag.

I wonder if var type boxing was done for some specific reasons? If there are no strict reasons, I would vote for unboxing them to simplify condition checking.

Commencez par localiser ResourceHandlerRequest et examiner les deux commits liés qui ont introduit les champs Boolean boxed. Vérifiez comment snapshotRequested et rollback sont utilisés, puis déterminez si les booléens primitifs sont appropriés et si les tests existants couvrent les vérifications de conditions null ou booléennes. Le travail est terminé lorsque la justification est établie et que les types de flag choisis fonctionnent de manière sûre pour les callers.

Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.