Jquery plugin

Jquery plugin.

Since jquery's model is that every module adds functionality to the $ symbol (i.e. the variable returned by the jquery/core module), I opted to allow listing multiple modules for the plugin, ex:

 ```js
require(["requirejs-dplugins/jquery!attributes/classes,effects"], function ($){
    ...
    $(myNode).addClass("selected");
    $(myNode).animate(...);
});
```

Other things to note:

jQuery code is in jquery/src dir by default, so plugin is mapping to that directory automatically.   Seems a bit weird.

This PR also includes some other enhancements:

1. standardizing the test directories into unit/ and functional/ (like other projects)
2. upgrade to intern 2.1

TODO:  automate build test (webdriver load app.html and check output)

> I think the main difference here is that css! is actually using the dojo promises in the code while jquery! is not using jquery

I think you are really splitting hairs.  The jquery! plugin depends on jquery, and the css! plugin depends on dojo.   Developers won't care about *how* the css! plugin depends on dojo vs. *how* the jquery! plugin depends on jquery.

> There is actually an issue to remove the dojo dependency (see #4) 

One obvious way to do that is to use the Deferred code from jQuery, rather than from dojo.   jQuery's promises have issues but they are certainly sufficient for the css! plugin.   Is that the route we will likely take?  If so, your distinctions between how css! depends on dojo/ vs. how jquery! depends on jquery become meaningless.

> there is always the "mobile" case where things happened to be deployed on the device while un-needed.

As I've said before, the only way to solve that general problem is through a build.  The majority of people using any part of ibm-js code *will need* small parts of jquery and dojo, so the important issue becomes only pulling in the jquery and dojo files they need.   And more importantly, only pulling in the deliteful and ecma402 files they need.  Note that deliteful is 2x bigger than jquery, and ecma402 is 5x bigger:

```
$ du -s * |sort -n
40	requirejs-domready
72	requirejs-text
192	requirejs
208	requirejs-dplugins
248	dcl
248	decor
264	dpointer
1056	dstore
2040	jquery
2200	delite
5896	deliteful
13728	ecma402
14016	dojo
```

> Finally in a lot of case people will just use the single down jquery file and actually don't even need [the jquery from bower install].

Yes, but they will likely still get the jquery from bower install because it will be installed as a dependency of delite (and many other ibm-js packages).

So I think you are looking at a corner case of all these conditions:

1. people that are using requirejs-dplugins without using other ibm-js packages like delite
2. and that don't do a build
3. and that are creating an app to deploy to mobile devices, rather than making a web site (aka web application)
4. and where the size of jquery is an issue even though somehow the size of packages like ecma402 is not an issue