feat: Add organization artifact metadata APIs

[maishivamhoo123]

Description

This PR implements the Organization Artifact Metadata APIs as requested in #3917.
This version corrects the scope from Repository to Organization level.

Changes

• Logic: Moved implementation to github/orgs_artifacts.go.
• Endpoints Added:
  • POST /orgs/{org}/artifacts/metadata/deployment-record
  • POST /orgs/{org}/artifacts/metadata/deployment-record/cluster/{cluster}
  • POST /orgs/{org}/artifacts/metadata/storage-record
  • GET /orgs/{org}/artifacts/{subject_digest}/metadata/deployment-records
  • GET /orgs/{org}/artifacts/{subject_digest}/metadata/storage-records
• Testing: Added comprehensive unit tests in github/orgs_artifacts_test.go.
• Generated: Updated github-accessors.go and github-stringify_test.go via script/generate.sh.

Checklist

• I have reviewed my own diff for unnecessary changes.
• All tests pass (script/test.sh).
• Code is linted (script/lint.sh).
• Ran script/generate.sh.

Fixes #3917

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.52%. Comparing base (c9865d7) to head (0027f99).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3944      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.50%   93.52%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         206      207       +1     
  Lines       17550    17600      +50     
==========================================
+ Hits        16411    16461      +50     
  Misses        938      938              
  Partials      201      201              

☔ 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.

[maishivamhoo123]

@gmlewis Sir can you please review the code?

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @maishivamhoo123, @alexandear , and @Not-Dhananjay-Mishra!
LGTM.
Awaiting second LGTM+Approval from any other contributor to this repo before merging.

cc: @stevehipwell - @zyfy29

[maishivamhoo123]

@Not-Dhananjay-Mishra can you please check once i think the latest pr is able to meet all your requirements?

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @maishivamhoo123!
All new tests need to add a call to testBadOptions to improve code coverage. Please search the repo for examples using testBadOptions and do likewise.

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @maishivamhoo123!
LGTM.
Awaiting second LGTM+Approval from any other contributor to this repo before merging.

cc: @stevehipwell - @alexandear - @zyfy29 - @Not-Dhananjay-Mishra

[maishivamhoo123]

@alexandear , @Not-Dhananjay-Mishra , @gmlewis can you please review the changes , I made all the suggested changes .

[Not-Dhananjay-Mishra]

LGTM

[gmlewis]

@maishivamhoo123 - it looks to me like you addressed all the review feedback... (thank you!), but just to be sure, let's let @alexandear respond, and then we will merge.

[maishivamhoo123]

@alexandear Sir Thank you Sir for your review I made all the suggested changes can you please check ?
Thank you sir!