feat: workflow and build updates

[jonstelly]

Changes

• combine pre-release and tagged-release workflows - just looking to simplify/combine the tagged and pre-release build workflows, there's a bit of conditional logic in just a few places in the release workflow, mainly around the release creation
• macos 15 runners - macos 13 runners were deprecated/removed and I don't think github has a macos 14 intel runner so I moved everything macos to macos 15
• add linux arm build - copied linux x86-64 job to create a linux arm build
• updated release action - the previous release action has archived their repository so assuming it's no longer maintained, just switched to a different popular release action, seems to have roughly same features

Open questions / notes

• I'm not familiar with nix cachix stuff, but I think I also need to add a nix build for linux-arm in the cachix.yml
• In the combined release flow, I added:
  • ability to manually trigger a release from a branch (trigger a release from any branch via github ui)
  • in manually triggered releases, ability to specify a name for the build
  • pre-release release tag (not git tag) that's either the manually-specified name, or the branch name. I believe this would allow having 1 pre-release per branch (or manual name)... it keeps most of the benefit of pre-release 'latest' tag to keep release storage needs low (new releases overwrite old with same release tag), but support builds from multiple branches. I'm still testing this
• I added architecture tags to the binary/release-artifact names, all binaries in release are lan-mouse-<OS>-<ARCH>... There are so many different standards for architecture tags, I don't have any strong feelings so happy to use the same tags everywhere or whatever you'd like. I generally think amd64 and arm64 are too similar which is why I went with x86-64 for linux and windows and intel for macos (feels more common for macos things).
• I tried to add a windows arm build/release as well, but it was having issues with gtk4, and I've heard that windows intel emulation on arm windows is alright, so there's probably not a ton of value to having a separate windows arm build IMO