break up the runtestprotocol and create a sequence of setup/teardown/call actions

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

the current usage of setupstate and runtestprotocol creates problematic quirks with tear-down,
to elevate that problem and separate reports better, we should instead have a generator for setup/teardown actions and use those to report setup of items and fixtures as well as the running of items

that way we could remove the need for next-item and ensure each report is much more specific

[The-Compiler]

I don't understand this issue, but I doubt it should block 3.0. Let me know if you disagree.

[nicoddemus]

@RonnyPfannschmidt is this something you want to tackle for 4.1 or 4.2 still?

[RonnyPfannschmidt]

@nicoddemus i beelive its more of a 6.0 or 7.0 thing - it will require breaking changes

before delving into it i'd like to resolve config, nodes and storage apis since doing it before would incur really bad and strange tech debt

[nicoddemus]

@RonnyPfannschmidt I'm moving this for the 7.0 milestone (just so we don't lose sight of it, I believe this will take more work even for 7.0 still).