Update the Operator CRD Spec to allow me to specify an operator with a particular packageName

[awgreene]

User Story:
As a cluster admin, I would like an operator CRD to be introduced that allows me to define the operator I would like to install.
Why is this important?

• The Operator API will act as a top-level resource for users installing operators. This viewpoint will significantly improve the users ability to understand the state of a given operator.
• The proposed API introduced in this epic consists of a single field within the spec. This is the minimum API service that enables developers to introduce a workflow that will install an operator from a catalogSource on cluster. This work will eventually be expanded upon so we may realize the goals of OLM v1.

Acceptance Criteria:

• A new project is created with Kubebuilder.
• A new operator CRD is created.
• The operator API should allow users to specify the packageName.
• A controller exists that reconciles the operator CR.

Out of Scope:

• Results do not need to be deterministic. For example, the package may be fulfilled by an entity within any catalogSource.

[awgreene]

Prereqs:

• Branch main to prototype branch Clear operator-controller repository #67
• Clear main branch history Clear operator-controller repository #67
• Initialize project with Kubebuilder Create operator-controller using kubebuilder #68
• Introduce the operator CRD and controller. The CRD may have an empty spec Create operator-controller using kubebuilder #68

Action Items:

• Introduce the spec.Package field. Introduce the spec.Package field to the Operator API #69
• Create a GA Milestone issue that captures that the spec.Package field will likely need to be changed in order to support other sourcing techniques. For example, installing a bundle image directly. Add support for sourcing content from non-catalog sources #60
• Create a GA Milestone issue that captures that were ignoring deterministic results. When reconciling multiple operator CRs, the solution set should be deterministic #87

[dmesser]

This is actually done, right?

[dtfranz]

Yes, this should be done as of #69