enforce rfc1123 label compatibility for olm.package.name

[grokspawn]

Description of the change:

Motivation for the change:
in the interest of facilitating package name uniqueness with FBC catalogs, it's in our best interests to have the key attribute able to satisfy the requirements of metadata.name which some storage requires. There is already prior art which prevents compliance with the more stringent RFC1035 (https://dev.operatorhub.io/operator/3scale-community-operator) but there is no currently published operator in public catalogs which fails RFC1123 label compliance in olm.package.name, so this PR would make that a requirement going forward.

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Docs updated or added to /docs
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive

[openshift-ci]

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@9fdedc2). Click here to learn what that means.
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #1307   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   50.08%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      132           
  Lines             ?    12745           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?     6383           
  Misses            ?     5307           
  Partials          ?     1055           

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

[perdasilva]

lgtm - nice one!!! thank you =D

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: grokspawn, perdasilva

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [grokspawn,perdasilva]

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

[grokspawn]

@perdasilva I think this repo needs the leading slash on bot commands, e.g. '/lgtm'. 😞

[perdasilva]

/lgtm

[grokspawn]

Thanks @perdasilva!