chore: [IOAPPX-503] Rename workflows

[LazyAfternoons]

Short description

This PR renames the existing workflows to better reflect their corresponding workflow file names. It also adds names to each step to make the checks section under each PR clearer.

After merging this PR, if accepted, I'll also update the ruleset for the required checks.

List of changes proposed in this pull request

N/A

How to test

N/A

[github-actions]

Jira Pull Request Link

This Pull Request refers to Jira issues:

• IOAPPX-503

[github-actions]

PR Title Validation for conventional commit type

✅ All good! PR title follows the conventional commit type.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.96%. Comparing base (5ddf434) to head (590f218).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #7717   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.96%   59.96%           
=======================================
  Files        1905     1905           
  Lines       41802    41802           
  Branches     9687     9620   -67     
=======================================
  Hits        25067    25067           
  Misses      16662    16662           
  Partials       73       73           

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5ddf434...590f218. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[mastro993]

"Release new cycle” sounds a bit off, since you usually release an artifact, not a cycle.
Would “New release cycle” be clearer?

[LazyAfternoons]

I'd like to keep them imperative. Maybe we can rename the 3 publish workflow as:

• Publish new app cycle;
• Publish new app release candidate;
• Promote latest release candidate to beta;
• Publish Canary.

Does it make sense to you?

[mastro993]

Yes, it makes sense. Thank you!

[LazyAfternoons]

Actually, I think we could make it every more clear but I think we have to discuss this internally. Instead of using "cycle" and "release candidate" we could use:

• Publish app version;
• Publish app build;
• Promote latest build to beta;
• Publish app canary.

I think it might be more clearer as we basically release a new app version and then iterate over it by producing more builds.