refactor: Update application-api references

[thepetk]

Description

The PR updates all references to application-api using the new organization konflux-ci instead of redhat-appstudio.

It also removes any mentions to DeploymentTarget as it was removed here

Issue ticket number and link

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DEVHAS-656

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

Checklist:

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have added meaningful description with JIRA/GitHub issue key(if applicable), for example HASSuiteDescribe("STONE-123456789 devfile source")
• I have updated labels (if needed)

[openshift-ci]

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

[thepetk]

The PR checks are now failing because konflux-ci/application-api#83 needs to be merged.

[thepetk]

/retest

failing ci, code changes lgtm though

[thepetk]

@johnbieren yes, I think redhat-appstudio/application-service#476 needs to be merged first. Added WIP prefix.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[thepetk]

@dheerajodha I had to rebase my PR. I've just pushed the updated version. Could you please review once more? Thanks!

[dheerajodha]

@thepetk Sure, I'm seeing some conflicts with the go.sum file, would that need to be fixed beforehand?
If not, I'll add the lgtm label. Wdyt?

[thepetk]

@thepetk Sure, I'm seeing some conflicts with the go.sum file, would that need to be fixed beforehand? If not, I'll add the lgtm label. Wdyt?

Done! I have lost the count on the times I rebased :D Thanks for the help!

[dheerajodha]

/test redhat-appstudio-e2e
/lgtm

[thepetk]

@dheerajodha I've rebased once more, I feel the faster we merge it the better :D

[dheerajodha]

/lgtm

[dheerajodha]

@dheerajodha I've rebased once more, I feel the faster we merge it the better :D

Ah sorry about that, idky it gave you this rebase hell, this doesn't usually happen :D but merged it finally 🎉