pkg(profiling-node): port profiling-node repo to monorepo (#10151)

Ports profiling-node to monorepo

This should only require CI step changes and no changes to the source
code (except inheriting from base configs in monorepo, but those were
already ported to profiling-node so they shouldn't result in any actual
changes to the codebase).

TODO:
 - [x] verify pkg cmds work and we have no lint/ts issues.
 - [x] verify tests pass
 - [x] verify ci commands work
 - [x] prebuild binaries
 - [x] port build to rollup
 - [x] create e2e verdaccio config
 - [x] ensure e2e tests pass and the app can build.
 
 
I'm opening this as ready to review. Currently e2e test on profiling
fails as the package is missing. I'm not exactly sure why that is so
hoping I can get a helping hand on that. The condition for a successful
e2e test is to just execute a node script which triggers a profile and
attempt to bundle profiling-node. The bundler test is there to ensure
that we do in fact provide all of the statically required prebuild
binaries and ensure bundlers can resolve them - else we risk breaking
build tooling for folks bundling their code, which can be a common
optimization in serverless environments.
 
 The good:
- Node profiling can resolve some issues around types which kept falling
out fo sync with the SDK
- We can follow the changes in JS SDK and core packages along as well as
their versioning
- The integration between the rest of the packages is tighter and safer,
as it should be impossible for the sentry-javascript packages we rely on
now to break in profiling-node.
  
The unfortunate:
- CI timings will increase mostly because of the performance of windows
runners. Installing repository dependencies on there takes roughly 10
minutes. I have tried leveraging the cache as much as I could, but since
our dep paths are marked as `~/path/to/cached_dep` and
`${{github.workspace}}/path/to/dep` it means they cannot be cached cross
os as paths differ. I did not change those paths in this PR, but it can
be an optimization as I suspect most of the packages are pure js and
nothing would break.
- When we pack artifacts in yarn build:tarball, we need skip
profiling-node and assemble it separately. This is because we need to
pull in the prebuilt binaries, else we'll only have the packed binary
for the os we are running the action on. This same step needs to be
replicated in e2e tests which prepare the tarball as well.

Couple of things I had to fix:
- Our build tooling was not windows compatible (util polyfill was using
awrong os path separator which wound up creating an incompatible build
output on windows)
- CI is finicky. I learned the hard way that node-gyp configure and
build need to be sequential, else all hell breaks loose and for reasons
which I didn't bother to investigate, python path and tooling is never
correctly resolved (even when specified via gyp arg)

Author: JonasBa

Diff for: .craft.yml

@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ targets:
   - name: npm
     id: '@sentry/node'
     includeNames: /^sentry-node-\d.*\.tgz$/
+  - name: npm
+    id: '@sentry/profiling-node'
+    includeNames: /^sentry-profiling-node-\d.*\.tgz$/
 
   ## 3 Browser-based Packages
   - name: npm