perf(ci): only publish artifacts on git version tags of main

[raynatopedrajeta]

Commit to be reviewed

---

perf(ci): only publish artifacts on git version tags of main

Primary Changes 
----------------
1. Remove auto publishing of container images in all **publish.yaml upon push and maintain automation runs during pull requests

Fixes #2360

Pull Request Requirements

• Rebased onto upstream/main branch and squashed into single commit to help maintainers review it more efficient and to avoid spaghetti git commit graphs that obfuscate which commit did exactly what change, when and, why.
• Have git sign off at the end of commit message to avoid being marked red. You can add -s flag when using git commit command. You may refer to this link for more information.
• Follow the Commit Linting specification. You may refer to this link for more information.

Character Limit

• Pull Request Title and Commit Subject must not exceed 72 characters (including spaces and special characters).
• Commit Message per line must not exceed 80 characters (including spaces and special characters).

A Must Read for Beginners
For rebasing and squashing, here's a must read guide for beginners.

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

The publishing of artifacts shall happen only upon the creation of a tag. Requesting changes for the same

[petermetz]

^^ Please see https://github.com/hyperledger/cacti/pull/3278#discussion_r1610827731

[raynatopedrajeta]

Hello @petermetz ,

Review point has been addressed. Re-requested for review.

FYI @jagpreetsinghsasan

Thanks!
Ren

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

Congratulations @raynatopedrajeta for your first PR to Hyperledger Cacti !
Keep up the good work 🥳

[raynatopedrajeta]

Congratulations @raynatopedrajeta for your first PR to Hyperledger Cacti ! Keep up the good work 🥳

Thanks a lot @jagpreetsinghsasan ! Looking forward for more learnings with the team!

[petermetz]

@raynatopedrajeta Please resolve the merge conflicts, other than that it should be good to go from my side.

[petermetz]

@jagpreetsinghsasan Were your concerns addressed?

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

@jagpreetsinghsasan Were your concerns addressed?

Yes @petermetz , the diff looks fine now

[petermetz]

@jagpreetsinghsasan OK, thank you.

@raynatopedrajeta Please rebase and resolve the conflicts and then re-request review from both me and @jagpreetsinghsasan and we'll get this merged ASAP.

[raynatopedrajeta]

Hello @petermetz and @jagpreetsinghsasan ,
Review changes has been addressed.

Thanks!

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

LGTM. Thanks for a quick rebase, @raynatopedrajeta

Jagpreet said the review points have been addressed.

[petermetz]

@raynatopedrajeta Oops, one more nit: Please fix the ActionLint check that's been failing:

[raynatopedrajeta]

Hello @petermetz ,

I have pushed another fix for the action lint. However I can't run the workflows yet since it needs maintainer's approval.

Please let me know if there will be more changes.

Thanks!

Raynato

[jagpreetsinghsasan]

Hello @petermetz ,

I have pushed another fix for the action lint. However I can't run the workflows yet since it needs maintainer's approval.

Please let me know if there will be more changes.

Thanks!

Raynato

Done @raynatopedrajeta !!

[petermetz]

@raynatopedrajeta LGTM, thank you for the updates!