Refactor action wait code

[lucasrod16]

Describe what should be investigated or refactored

The code for executing action waits should be refactored to make it easier to extend

Links to any relevant code

src/pkg/utils/wait.go

Additional context

@Noxsios @AustinAbro321

Looked into adding a --silent flag to control the output of zarf tools wait-for in #2180 and found that the function signature for ExecuteWait would grow to 7 input parameters

[Racer159]

This may be a good opportunity to look at making this a common library for things like Lula as well

[lucasrod16]

@phillebaba @AustinAbro321 and I were chatting about this today.

Things to consider for this refactor:

1. Look into using kstatus package to take advantage of upstream, well-tested logic. This would replace our current behavior of shelling out to kubectl

   • https://pkg.go.dev/sigs.k8s.io/cli-utils@v0.35.0/pkg/kstatus#section-readme

2. See if there are any places to simplify our wait API. The Flux Kustomization spec.healthChecks can be used for reference/inspiration

   • https://fluxcd.io/flux/components/kustomize/kustomizations/#health-checks

[phillebaba]

I second the point of adopting kstatus and adding a healthChecks list additionally. We had success in Flux doing it this way as it would also support health checking CRDs as long as they conformed to kstatus. Over time other projects added support for kstatus as people requested compatibility with Flux.

[Noxsios]

I'm always down for removing shell abstractions, send it

[phillebaba]

I have done some exploration of the existing code now to understand any potential challenges. The main one is that we need a standard method of fetching Kubernetes configuration. Right now the CLI depends on the host machine being properly configured. We may want to add a --kubeconfig flag to allow explicitly setting this.

[phillebaba]

My suggestion for addressing this is to add health checking as a feature now that we have a shared health checking pkg. This would mimic the behavior that Flux has pretty closely. My suggestion is that we add a new field to the components that allow the users to specify their health checks.

kind: ZarfPackageConfig
metadata:
  name: argocd
  description: Example showcasing installing ArgoCD
components:
  - name: argocd-helm-chart
    required: true
    charts:
      - name: argo-cd
        version: 5.54.0
        namespace: argocd
        url: https://argoproj.github.io/argo-helm
        releaseName: argocd-baseline
        valuesFiles:
          - baseline/values.yaml
    images:
      - docker.io/library/redis:7.0.15-alpine
      - quay.io/argoproj/argocd:v2.9.6
      # Cosign artifacts for images - argocd - argocd-helm-chart
      - quay.io/argoproj/argocd:sha256-2dafd800fb617ba5b16ae429e388ca140f66f88171463d23d158b372bb2fae08.sig
      - quay.io/argoproj/argocd:sha256-2dafd800fb617ba5b16ae429e388ca140f66f88171463d23d158b372bb2fae08.att
    healthChecks:
      - apiVersion: v1
        kind: Deployment
        name: argocd
        namespace: argocd

My plan is that we just use the timeout set when calling the Zarf command.