feat: Mapping component versions to RHOAI releases

[Sara4994]

<!---
Many thanks for submitting your Pull Request ❤️!

Please complete the following sections for a smooth review.
-->

Description

The PR is a first step to the feature initiative tracked in JIRA and this PR adds feature to capture RHOAI release versions from all the components(that are supported by DSC) repositories and include it in the DSC status.

JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHOAIENG-12619

How Has This Been Tested?

To test with DevFlags:

• In a forked version of the components repository and create an .env file in config/manifest directory, have it in your branch.
• Point that forked repository as a DevFlag like this
• Build and deploy the changes into the cluster.
• Create DSCI and DSC instances and you will be able see the status.components get updated with component upstream release details like below

`
apiVersion: datasciencecluster.opendatahub.io/v1
kind: DataScienceCluster
metadata:

spec:
components:

status:
components:
datasciencepipelines
upstreamReleases:
- name: datasciencepipelines
displayName: Red Hat Build of Kubeflow Pipelines
version: 2.2.0
repoUrl: https://github.com/opendatahub-io/data-science-pipelines
`

Screenshot or short clip

Merge criteria

• You have read the contributors guide.
• Commit messages are meaningful - have a clear and concise summary and detailed explanation of what was changed and why.
• Pull Request contains a description of the solution, a link to the JIRA issue, and to any dependent or related Pull Request.
• Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
• The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from sara4994. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[ykaliuta]

It's still draft, isn't it?

[lburgazzoli]

@Sara4994 I'd like to see this kind of steps to be performed only once i.e. at initialization time as component version won't change during the lifetime of the operator.

[github-actions]

This PR can't be merged just yet 😢

Please run make generate manifests api-docs and commit the changes.

For more info: https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/actions/runs/11404123045

[github-actions]

This PR can't be merged just yet 😢

Please run make generate manifests api-docs and commit the changes.

For more info: https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/actions/runs/11445735405

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (incubation@bde4b4e). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...atasciencecluster/datasciencecluster_controller.go	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             incubation    #1299   +/-   ##
=============================================
  Coverage              ?   19.09%           
=============================================
  Files                 ?       30           
  Lines                 ?     3368           
  Branches              ?        0           
=============================================
  Hits                  ?      643           
  Misses                ?     2656           
  Partials              ?       69           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

This PR can't be merged just yet 😢

Please run make generate manifests api-docs and commit the changes.

For more info: https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/actions/runs/11445853071

[zdtsw]

do not checkin manager binary

[zdtsw]

some small parts, otherwise i am fine with the changes.

[Sara4994]

/test opendatahub-operator-e2e

[github-actions]

This PR can't be merged just yet 😢

Please run make generate manifests api-docs and commit the changes.

For more info: https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/actions/runs/11579205049

[Sara4994]

@ykaliuta @zdtsw @VaishnaviHire @lburgazzoli I have tweaked GetReleaseVersion function to read release info from an yaml file instead of an env.

Reason: few components have got multiple upstreams, reading release info of multiple upstreams from an env would be tricky, whereas with yaml we could group the info based on the upstream, and it would be easy to fetch the details at our end. So made it as yaml file.

Please feel free to share your thoughts.

[Sara4994]

/cc @grdryn

[grdryn]

/hold

(at least until ./manager is removed from the patch set)

[grdryn]

/unhold

It looks like, for better or worse, the merge automation in this repo will squash all commits in a PR into a single commit, when merging, so the fact that the manager binary was added and then removed in separate commits won't matter: those should cancel each other out and it won't exist in the final history.

[lburgazzoli]

I think GetReleaseVersion should return a []ComponentReleaseStatus not the entire ComponentStatus

[Sara4994]

@lburgazzoli but incase of yaml file not present in the components repo, we discussed to show empty struct against component names. such error conditions are handled in the functions itself so as returning empty struct. When returning []ComponentReleaseStatus , will have to handle error cases in components.

[lburgazzoli]

you can return an empty list, if you sue omitempty in the tags, then it won't not show up

[Sara4994]

@lburgazzoli yep, have made this changes now. :)

[ykaliuta]

I think GetReleaseVersion should return a []ComponentReleaseStatus not the entire ComponentStatus

If it returns ReleaseStatus, why it's still called GetReleaseVersion? (asked @Sara4994 already)

[Sara4994]

@ykaliuta renamed it now. thanks

[lburgazzoli]

I think we need to distinguish between a file not present from an error, in this case we are swallowing it and I'm not sure that's the right approach as it could hide some other errors.

[Sara4994]

this is done