refactor: enable linter rule QF1008 for 'Omit embedded fields from selector expression'

[mwbrooks]

Summary

This pull request enables the linter staticcheck rule QF1008: 'Omit embedded fields from selector expression'.

This rule ensures that we omit embedded fields from an expression. For example, the type TriggerUpdateRequest has the embedded field TriggerRequest:

type TriggerUpdateRequest struct {
	TriggerRequest
	TriggerID string `json:"trigger_id"`
}

And the following two expressions are equal in Golang:

• triggerUpdateRequest.TriggerRequest.Inputs = something
• triggerUpdateRequest.Inputs = something

Hedging a guess, we only need to use the embedded field when there is a naming conflict. 🤔

Requirements

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 56.52174% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 63.31%. Comparing base (09d4247) to head (b8ea6ee).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
internal/api/datastore.go	27.27%	7 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
internal/api/workflows.go	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
internal/pkg/platform/deploy.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #95      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   63.32%   63.31%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         211      211              
  Lines       22282    22282              
==========================================
- Hits        14110    14107       -3     
- Misses       7085     7086       +1     
- Partials     1087     1089       +2     

☔ 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.

[zimeg]

@mwbrooks Thank so much for sharing the reasoning of this change!

For me this makes it more clear that certain structs have fields attached and perhaps this makes for better objects overall? Let's revisit this after some time developing 👾

[zimeg]

This reads sososo much better to me 📚🥹✨