Merge integration tests

[abhiii71]

This PR reorganizes and merges the existing operator integration and e2e tests into a single consistent location under cmd/thv-operator/test-integration/ for better maintainability. Specifically:

Moved MCPRegistry tests to cmd/thv-operator/test-integration/mcp-registry

Moved MCPServer tests to cmd/thv-operator/test-integration/mcp-server

Updated Taskfile and CI workflows to run all operator e2e tests in a single task

Fixed CRD paths for proper test environment setup

These changes align with the issue #2125
regarding consolidating operator integration tests.

Linked Issue:
#2125

[dmartinol]

@ChrisJBurns I just realized that, with the existing folder structure, task operator-test also runs the integration tests. Was it done on purpose? This task takes a long time to complete now 🤔

[abhiii71]

I'm not entirely sure about that - I didn’t intend to make operator-test include integration tests. Could you please clarify how we’d want to separate them properly?

[ChrisJBurns]

@dmartinol I don't think it was intended, I'm happy to have several tasks for the different tests if you feel it's useful. unit / integration / e2e / all. It's tricky because the root task test covered everything so we have to exclude things with grep -v /etc/etc/ to ignore certain tests.

[dmartinol]

@dmartinol I don't think it was intended, I'm happy to have several tasks for the different tests if you feel it's useful. unit / integration / e2e / all. It's tricky because the root task test covered everything so we have to exclude things with grep -v /etc/etc/ to ignore certain tests.

let's resolve this once we split the operator in its own repo: there we can move ITs in dedicated folder and remove ambiguities. I would approve this as is once @abhiii71 removes the operator-e2e-test-ginkgo task. WDYT?

[abhiii71]

Removed the redundant operator-e2e-test-ginkgo task to avoid ambiguity with existing test tasks, as suggested by @dmartinol.

Is there anything else that needs to be addressed or anything left?

[dmartinol]

LGTM, thank you!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 48.84%. Comparing base (7af3027) to head (824dcea).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2131      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   48.89%   48.84%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         242      242              
  Lines       30714    30714              
==========================================
- Hits        15017    15003      -14     
- Misses      14572    14590      +18     
+ Partials     1125     1121       -4     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[dmartinol]

some CI tests to fix, like:

...
      unable to install CRDs onto control plane: unable to read CRD files: stat ../../../deploy/charts/operator-crds/crds: no such file or directory
...

an you hanlde this, @abhiii71 ?

[abhiii71]

@dmartinol, Got it! I can take a look at the CI failures related to the CRD files. I’ll investigate why the path is failing and propose a fix.

Do you want me to create a separate PR for this fix once ready?