airbyte-ci: do not send slack message on pre-release

[alafanechere]

What

Closes https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte-internal-issues/issues/8983
To avoid noise in #connector-publish-updates and #connector-publish-failures I suggest to not send slack message on pre-release.
As pre-release are a manually triggered via a github workflow, developers will be aware of failures if their workflow fails.
No need to have automated slack messages.

[vercel]

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

1 Skipped Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
airbyte-docs	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Aug 12, 2024 10:08am

[alafanechere]

• airbyte-ci: do not send slack message on pre-release #43724 👈
• master

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

Join @alafanechere and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[clnoll]

The code change looks fine, but are these really noisy enough that we want the extra control flow? When I was doing connector development I did appreciate the notification that publishing failed instead of having to see it in GHA some time later.

Not actually requesting code changes but wanted to verify that we want to do this. Doing a quick scan of #connector-publish-updates where these notifications used to go I'm not seeing very many notifications for pre-releases.

[alafanechere]

The code change looks fine, but are these really noisy enough that we want the extra control flow? When I was doing connector development I did appreciate the notification that publishing failed instead of having to see it in GHA some time later.

Not actually requesting code changes but wanted to verify that we want to do this. Doing a quick scan of #connector-publish-updates where these notifications used to go I'm not seeing very many notifications for pre-releases.

@clnoll The thing is that pre-release failures will land in #connector-publish-failures. I'd love this channel to only contain alerts we should really act on. I could send these failures to #connector-publish-updates but it would also lead to a control flow change, and a rather clumsy one IMO.

[clnoll]

but it would also lead to a control flow change, and a rather clumsy one IMO.

Actually, couldn't that be done with a pretty minor change to the slack notification step? As a side note, do we have a clear story on when slack notifications should be sent directly in a GHA step versus by airbyte-ci?

Anyway, that could be a separate issue if we want to do it.

I'm good with trying to keep the publish failure channel clean.