Make data connection for S3 model sources AWS-unspecific

[manaswinidas]

Fixes #1381

Description

Changes as suggested in #1381 comment

How Has This Been Tested?

1. Check out the PR branch
2. Try to create a data connection and/or pipeline server using the "Create New data connection" option. Also, look at the modal after clicking on "View Pipeline Configuration" while the pipeline is getting created and while Deploying a model using a "New Data Connection"

Test Impact

Just visual changes as described in #1381 and added test for endpoint required field for "Deploy model"

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

• The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
• The commits have meaningful messages (squashes happen on merge by the bot).
• Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
• The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit tests & storybook for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

• Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
• Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change.

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

• The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

[Gkrumbach07]

i have not looked at tests yet.

[Gkrumbach07]

Looks good. only concern is that this still will always default to AWS S3

export const getDataConnectionProvider = (dataConnection: DataConnection): string => {
  switch (dataConnection.type) {
    case DataConnectionType.AWS:
      return 'AWS S3';
    default:
      throw new Error('Invalid data connection type');
  }
};

@andrewballantyne is this ok

[lucferbux]

Looks good. only concern is that this still will always default to AWS S3

export const getDataConnectionProvider = (dataConnection: DataConnection): string => {
  switch (dataConnection.type) {
    case DataConnectionType.AWS:
      return 'AWS S3';
    default:
      throw new Error('Invalid data connection type');
  }
};

@andrewballantyne is this ok

I think the goal of that issue was to change the display name of the fields, we would support more providers in follow up changes. But I'll defer to @andrewballantyne's response here.

[Gkrumbach07]

/lgtm

The provider logic doesn't need to be changed

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andrewballantyne

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [andrewballantyne]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[andrewballantyne]

/hold

Sorry, one sec 😓

[andrewballantyne]

/unhold

Nevermind 😄

[shalberd]

@manaswinidas thank you. @lucferbux Yeah, the backend code libraries, be they in Python or Go or whatever, have AWS* in their env variables, even though they can work with all S3 compatible providers, that is ok, though.