chore: add type ResourcePoolName string

[carolinaecalderon]

Description

Introduce a new type ResourcePoolName string, that replaces resource pool name string input/output in RM methods & provides more description where used.

Test Plan

Pass existing tests

Commentary (optional)

I couldn't substitute ResourcePoolName type into sproto messages because of an import cycle -- ideally, as we move away from using sproto messages and simply passing in the variables, we can use ResourcePoolName wherever we pass in a string resource pool name.

Checklist

• Changes have been manually QA'd
• User-facing API changes need the "User-facing API Change" label.
• Release notes should be added as a separate file under docs/release-notes/.
  See Release Note for details.
• Licenses should be included for new code which was copied and/or modified from any external code.

Ticket

DET-76

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for determined-ui ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	0ee20b0
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/determined-ui/deploys/65ef29dce59403000848c3ab
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-8978--determined-ui.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 30 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 47.49%. Comparing base (6e1acf4) to head (0ee20b0).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8978   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   47.49%   47.49%           
=======================================
  Files        1167     1168    +1     
  Lines      176280   176284    +4     
  Branches     2352     2352           
=======================================
+ Hits        83720    83724    +4     
  Misses      92402    92402           
  Partials      158      158           

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	42.57% <33.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
harness	64.01% <ø> (ø)
web	42.83% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
master/internal/api_command.go	47.08% <100.00%> (ø)
master/internal/api_resourcepool.go	59.11% <100.00%> (ø)
master/internal/checkpoint_gc.go	65.93% <100.00%> (ø)
master/internal/job/jobservice/jobservice.go	8.46% <ø> (ø)
master/internal/rm/resource_manager_iface.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
master/internal/spec_util.go	55.81% <100.00%> (-0.51%)	⬇️
master/internal/sproto/jobs.go	17.39% <ø> (ø)
master/internal/api_experiment.go	54.84% <0.00%> (ø)
master/internal/api_generic_tasks.go	8.95% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
master/internal/api_job.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 4 more

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

[kkunapuli]

What do you think about defining a String() method for the ResourcePoolName type?

[kkunapuli]

I'm thinking that it would help differentiate the cases where we're creating a new ResourcePoolName using string( < text > ) and accessing the value of ResourcePoolName using resourcePoolName.String().

[stoksc]

i like this. i do it in most cases. i know string(name) works just fine, but if you do type ResourcePoolName string and define String() on it, then refactoring ResourcePoolName to not be a string is easier.

but, i mean, it's easy either way, so that isn't a killer argument.

[kkunapuli]

Just double-checking this change wasn't included by accident? It's fine to include but seems slightly unrelated to the rest of the changes?

[carolinaecalderon]

Ah I'll add it in the commentary, but this is dead code -- I just came across it in this PR, but we should remove it anyway

[kkunapuli]

No need to include it in the commentary! It's fine as is.

[kkunapuli]

LGTM! Couple minor questions but nothing that requires changes.

[stoksc]

don't wait on my review for this, @kkunapuli 's review is sufficient.