Improve messaging for templates processor

[sfc-gh-melnacouzi]

Pre-review checklist

• I've confirmed that instructions included in README.md are still correct after my changes in the codebase.
• I've added or updated automated unit tests to verify correctness of my new code.
• I've added or updated integration tests to verify correctness of my new code.
• I've confirmed that my changes are working by executing CLI's commands manually on MacOS.
• I've confirmed that my changes are working by executing CLI's commands manually on Windows.
• I've confirmed that my changes are up-to-date with the target branch.
• I've described my changes in the release notes.
• I've described my changes in the section below.

Changes description

Improve messaging for templates processor:

1. Improve artifact processor printing.
2. Add a message every time a file is templated and it's expanded:

Invoking artifact processors
  Processing artifact group [app/* -> ./] with templates processor
    Expanding templates in app/setup_script.sql

Update:
Now it's a bit different, after discussion:

Invoking artifact processors
  Processing Templates from app/dir/test
  Processing Templates from app/setup_script.sql

[sfc-gh-bdufour]

I don't see a reason why this should be different from the snowpark processor, which simply uses something like this:

Invoking artifact processors
    Processing Snowpark annotations from python/receipts.py
    Processing Snowpark annotations from python/regions.py

I think that from the POV of the user, too much information ends up being noise. What we're really trying to convey is the transformation that's happening for each file.

[sfc-gh-melnacouzi]

I can change it to be consistent.

[sfc-gh-bdufour]

minor, but when we chain processors, there might not be a source in the case of generated files.

In any case, the Snowpark processor outputs the dest path (relative to the deploy root), not the src path. At the very they should both align, so consider changing the Snowpark processor logic to match yours.

[sfc-gh-bdufour]

too late, since there could be errors raised before this is output. I get that you don't want to say anything about non-templated files, but we should then at least buffer the exceptions until we have a chance to tell the user what step is about to fail.

[sfc-gh-melnacouzi]

I thought about this, but since all errors will have the file name included, it might not be worth it. WDYT?

[sfc-gh-bdufour]

Definitely worth it IMHO. We should always tell the user what we're doing, and do so accurately.

[sfc-gh-turbaszek]

This example does not have SQL template, right?

[sfc-gh-melnacouzi]

From Jinja perspective it's considered it has it, and it will fail when expanding.