CI 🧹: clean up workflow naming

[alafanechere]

An attempt at making our workflow and job names simpler and more explicit for clearer CI checks on PRs

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
airbyte-docs	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		May 3, 2024 11:20am

[alafanechere]

• CI 🧹: clean up workflow naming #37792 👈
• master

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @alafanechere and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[bnchrch]

Ok. Ill be more attached to this since I added it in the first place 😅

But there was two things I wanted to solve originally

1. Define which team owned a workflow
2. Mark which of our workflows were "Business Critical" (e.g. Connector Publish) vs "one off creations" (Label Github issues, terminate zombie build instance, etc)

So Im fine changing these but is there a way to still achieve at least #2?

Unfortuantely we cant use folders

But perhaps we could either place the title slug at the end and try to shorten it
1. Connectors Weekly Tests [Ops CI]
1. Connectors Weekly Tests - Critical Ops CI

[alafanechere]

@bnchrch What do you think about using a critical_ prefix on the workflow file name?
I don't find it useful to show that a workflow is critical in the check name on PR, we know it's critical when it has a REQUIRED state.
I'd find it useful to use the filename prefix so that we can easily identify without subfolder, the critical workflow we're maintaining while not impacting the CI checks readability.

[bnchrch]

Great idea!

[clnoll]

@alafanechere will this change the sort order of these in GhA? I feel like it's easier to find the one I want when they're grouped together. But not a blocker if you feel that this is preferable.