feat: Add ability to run the e2e-tests from rhtap-build-tenant ns

[tisutisu]

rhtap-build-tenant:appstudio-pipeline SA needs the same level of privileges that our tekton-ci:appstudio-pipeline sa has, to be able to run the e2e-tests in build-templates-e2e namespace of production cluster.
This PR adds required role-binding for rhtap-build-tenant:appstudio-pipeline SA to run e2e-tests in build-templates-e2e ns.
Part of the story: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/STONEBLD-2353
After the source-build image is built, we will run the e2e-tests through the integration-pipeline added in this PR

[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

[chmeliik]

Could you improve the description to explain why exactly this is needed?

If I understand correctly, it's because we onboarded the https://github.com/redhat-appstudio/build-tasks-dockerfiles/ repo to konflux, so now all the pipelines in that repo have to run in the rhtap-build-tenant namespace. And we want to run e2e tests in that repo as a Tekton pipeline, not via Prow (why?).

[tisutisu]

Could you improve the description to explain why exactly this is needed?

If I understand correctly, it's because we onboarded the https://github.com/redhat-appstudio/build-tasks-dockerfiles/ repo to konflux, so now all the pipelines in that repo have to run in the rhtap-build-tenant namespace. And we want to run e2e tests in that repo as a Tekton pipeline, not via Prow (why?).

We wanted to use a konflux integration test for running the e2e-tests after source-build image is built, use similar approach like the build-definitions CI but it will be a integration-pipeline instead of build-pipeline so the rhtap-build-tenant:appstudio-pipeline needs the same level of privileges that our tekton-ci:appstudio-pipeline sa has, to be able to run the e2e-tests. Prow was not picked because we are migrating away from it and will be moving to all the konflux-ci in future. Does it makes sense?

[chmeliik]

/lgtm

Ack, thanks for the explanation 👍

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: chmeliik, tisutisu

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 [tisutisu]

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