[Java][Tests] Fix flaky test in SharedTypeScriptTest.java

Created by: yannizhou05

The test below in SharedTypeScriptTest.java was found flaky because of the ordering of result Array. The orders of elements in the Array are not the same as every time the test being called. In this case, the result array was sorted to ensure the orders do not cause the flakiness. This code change is trying to fix the flaky tests mentioned above, because they sometimes fail (as the picture showed) and sometimes pass. The failure could be reproduced by the commands above by using the tool of NonDex. The code change is to make sure the tests will always pass in this case.

• org.openapitools.codegen.typescript.SharedTypeScriptTest.toModelImportMapTest

The test failures could be reproduced by

1. mvn install -pl modules/openapi-generator -am -DskipTests
2. run tests with NonDex mvn -pl modules/openapi-generator edu.illinois:nondex-maven-plugin:1.1.2:nondex -Dtest=org.openapitools.codegen.typescript.SharedTypeScriptTest#toModelImportMapTest

PR checklist

• Read the contribution guidelines.
• Pull Request title clearly describes the work in the pull request and Pull Request description provides details about how to validate the work. Missing information here may result in delayed response from the community.
• Run the following to build the project and update samples:

  ./mvnw clean package 
  ./bin/generate-samples.sh
  ./bin/utils/export_docs_generators.sh

  Commit all changed files. This is important, as CI jobs will verify all generator outputs of your HEAD commit as it would merge with master. These must match the expectations made by your contribution. You may regenerate an individual generator by passing the relevant config(s) as an argument to the script, for example ./bin/generate-samples.sh bin/configs/java*. For Windows users, please run the script in Git BASH.
• File the PR against the correct branch: master (6.1.0) (minor release - breaking changes with fallbacks), 7.0.x (breaking changes without fallbacks)
• If your PR is targeting a particular programming language, @mention the technical committee members, so they are more likely to review the pull request.