release 0.50 broke backward compatibility with flush() method

[ToddBradley]

Describe the bug

Release 0.50 broke backward compatibility by removing the flush method on DogStatsd. The library documentation recommends that client apps use flush (see below). So either...

1. It was removed by accident, as part of PR 844 (Add client side aggregation #844), or
2. It was removed on purpose, and nobody thought to mention the breaking change in the CHANGELOG

To Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Take any application code that is compatible with version 0.49 and uses DogStatsd and the flush() method
2. Try to build or run it with version 0.50. It fails, because the flush method is missing

Expected behavior

If the design is moving away from wanting client apps to use flush, then a) the method should be marked deprecated, b) a note should be published in the CHANGELOG, and c) the documentation should be updated.

If the change was accidental, then regression tests should have caught the unintentional change and blocked PR 844.

Screenshots

N/A

Environment and Versions (please complete the following information):

datadogpy 0.49 and 0.50

Additional context

The documentation refers to flush here:

• https://datadogpy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/index.html?highlight=flush#datadog.dogstatsd.base.DogStatsd.flush
• https://docs.datadoghq.com/developers/dogstatsd/high_throughput/

See also #858

[github-actions]

Thanks for your contribution!

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days. Note that the issue will not be automatically closed, but this notification will remind us to investigate why there's been inactivity. Thank you for participating in the Datadog open source community.

If you would like this issue to remain open:

1. Verify that you can still reproduce the issue in the latest version of this project.

2. Comment that the issue is still reproducible and include updated details requested in the issue template.

[skarimo]

Thanks for the report. Resolved by #868