packagemanifests: do not list deprecated channel entries

[joelanford]

Description of the change:
Ignore bundles with property olm.deprecated when listing channel entries in the packagemanifests API.

Motivation for the change:
Follow up to #2893, which added the channel entry listing to the packagemanifests API. This is necessary to avoid misleading users about the set of bundles that available to install.

Architectural changes:

Testing remarks:

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Bug fixes are accompanied by regression test(s)
• e2e tests and flake fixes are accompanied evidence of flake testing, e.g. executing the test 100(0) times
• tech debt/todo is accompanied by issue link(s) in comments in the surrounding code
• Tests are comprehensible, e.g. Ginkgo DSL is being used appropriately
• Docs updated or added to /doc
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive
• Tests marked as [FLAKE] are truly flaky and have an issue
• Code is properly formatted

[grokspawn]

I see good handling for olm.deprecated property in the code, but I don't see deprecation markers in the unit test. I just see a new v0.6.0 of the etcd op. Am I missing something?

[joelanford]

@grokspawn This bit of added code ensures the 0.6.0 bundle is deprecated: https://github.com/joelanford/operator-lifecycle-manager/blob/d69c934f4e47429ee25b837edc2541a96a428e3e/pkg/package-server/provider/registry_test.go#L68-L72

[grokspawn]

/approve

[exdx]

Would this be considered a change of behavior and subsequently require a version bump?

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: exdx, grokspawn, joelanford

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]

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

[grokspawn]

Would this be considered a change of behavior and subsequently require a version bump?

I don't think so. In this same version timeframe we exposed the channel edges in this API and then restricted the edges we would expose.