test: deprecate or retire TestAppLogs & TestNamespacedAppLogs e2e tests

[zhaque44]

This effort is to help fix the ArgoCD build pipelines and help remove flaky tests:

Ticket: #13398

Adding tests for the PodLogs func:

1. TestPodLogs: This test verifies that the PodLogs function retrieves logs for a specific pod without any errors. It sets up the mocks, calls the function, and asserts that the returned logs match the expected logs.
2. TestPodLogs_RBAC: This test validates that the PodLogs function successfully retrieves logs for a specific pod, taking into account RBAC enforcement. It sets up mocks with RBAC policies, calls the function, and asserts that the returned logs.
3. TestPodLogs_Cancellation: This test verifies that the PodLogs function successfully retrieves logs for a specific pod and ensures that the logs are received without any errors.
4. TestPodLogs_CancellationError: This test validates that the PodLogs function handles the scenario where there is an error while retrieving the logs.

Checklist:

• Either (a) I've created an enhancement proposal and discussed it with the community, (b) this is a bug fix, or (c) this does not need to be in the release notes.
• The title of the PR states what changed and the related issues number (used for the release note).
• The title of the PR conforms to the Toolchain Guide
• I've included "Closes [ISSUE #]" or "Fixes [ISSUE #]" in the description to automatically close the associated issue.
• I've updated both the CLI and UI to expose my feature, or I plan to submit a second PR with them.
• Does this PR require documentation updates?
• I've updated documentation as required by this PR.
• Optional. My organization is added to USERS.md.
• I have signed off all my commits as required by DCO
• I have written unit and/or e2e tests for my change. PRs without these are unlikely to be merged.
• My build is green (troubleshooting builds).
• My new feature complies with the feature status guidelines.
• I have added a brief description of why this PR is necessary and/or what this PR solves.

Please see Contribution FAQs if you have questions about your pull-request.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -0.01 ⚠️

Comparison is base (f63b856) 49.57% compared to head (878ceab) 49.56%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #13956      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   49.57%   49.56%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         256      256              
  Lines       43920    43920              
==========================================
- Hits        21773    21770       -3     
- Misses      19985    19987       +2     
- Partials     2162     2163       +1     

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[zhaque44]

@crenshaw-dev hi, this PR is good to go, I need some help resolving the conflicts. They are in the go.sum file