Connector Ops CI Checks enforces that Beta+ connectors include an icon

[evantahler]

An icon should exist for Beta and GA connectors as part of the connector definitions and verify that it actually exists.

~~If possible, we can an also enforce the dimensions of the image (but timebox this work to ~1 day).~~

[sherifnada]

@evantahler how does Connector Ops think about the dependency between SAT and the platform? asking since historically SAT has been very stand-alone (you just need a connector to test and no other information), and icons live in the platform so this is starting to introduce more of a platform dep

[evantahler]

+1!

For this story specifically, I think that crossing the boundary is probably fine?

I think that connectors being stand-alone is a good goal, and long term we should probably make some changes. It's also pretty weird that there is information that the platform knows that a connector doesn't (UUID, release stage, etc). I think all of that information should be moved into the connector (maybe a yaml file, maybe docker tags) so that the source of truth for /all/ connector information. I imagine a connector-metadata.yaml file in every connector's directory which contains the information that's currently in source_definitions.yaml... and more information as we go. We then build connector-metadata.yaml from that.

[pedroslopez]

I would push back on having SAT validate things in the definitions/platform - my view is that SAT should be focused on ensuring that a connector adheres to the airbyte protocol. I think certification requirements are related, but different from connector functionality. (test suite vs app store review checks)

I like how, for example, when saying that GA connectors need to pass certain additional tests as part of the SAT it became a more general "strictness level", and we have a separate CI check that does know more about things outside the connector and can verify that connectors of a given release stage use a certain strictness level in SAT. My proposal would be to keep building this up with more certification-specific checks, like icon existence and dimensions.

This would feel less of a problem if metadata was exposed as part of the protocol or by the connector somehow, kind of like @evantahler mentioned. As a side note our icon situation definitely needs revisiting since they're baked into the platform and we should remove anything connector-related that's baked in. It's also became a barrier for people using our current v0 CMS jsons because the icons just point to paths within the platform codebase so they're unusable, but that's a different topic 😛

[alafanechere]

This will be covered by #21715 as part of the "Deploy All Eligible connectors to cloud project" ( #20553 ) The /test command will check this, but it won't be part of SAT tests.