[v13] - differentiate discovered resource names

[jentfoo]

v13 Backport of PRs #28845 #30086 and #30054. These PR's build on each other and include refactoring that makes it best to backport them together.

Backports fetcher refactoring from #28845 to branch/v13 without the renaming scheme applied

[public-teleport-github-review-bot]

@jentfoo - this PR will require admin approval to merge due to its size. Consider breaking it up into a series smaller changes.

[jentfoo]

I discussed this with @greedy52 in DM. We may not want to bring all these changes in the backport. He is going to help review and dissect this PR.

[greedy52]

@GavinFrazar I don't think #28845 should be backported. Could you confirm?

As discussed with @jentfoo , at the mean time, I will try backport the refactoring change separately

[greedy52]

backport of #30086:

• [v13] Refactor AWS db mocks #30461

No conflict for #30054 after this one ⬆️

[GavinFrazar]

@GavinFrazar I don't think #28845 should be backported. Could you confirm?

As discussed with @jentfoo , at the mean time, I will try backport the refactoring change separately

yes please don't backport the renaming stuff

edit: you can keep the changes from that PR, just remove renaming.go, renaming_test.go and all references to the Apply...Suffix funcs.

edit: applied in 3c5e686

[greedy52]

@GavinFrazar I don't think #28845 should be backported. Could you confirm?
As discussed with @jentfoo , at the mean time, I will try backport the refactoring change separately

yes please don't backport the renaming stuff

edit: you can keep the changes from that PR, just remove renaming.go, renaming_test.go and all references to the Apply...Suffix funcs.

edit: applied in 3c5e686

Thanks for removing the renaming. I think we can either merge this one, or #30461 + #30462

[GavinFrazar]

@greedy52 how about we merge #30461 and #30462 and then rebase this one onto those, just to pull the refactored fetchers into v13 (to make future backports easier).

edit: or just close this one and i'll do that backport separately. I think it'll be easier to track the backports individually vs one combo backport