[AUTOWORK-205] Rename "CustomAction" to "Automations" namespace

[oliverguenther]

Converts all CustomAction references to automations, including tables and serialization. No functionality added, as automations will be created with a fixed trigger for "Manual button press"

https://community.openproject.org/work_packages/AUTOWORK-205

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/wikis/spec/features/admin/internal_provider_spec.rb[1:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #25163, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/wikis/spec/features/admin/internal_provider_spec.rb[1:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #25163. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #25163 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @oliverguenther to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @oliverguenther, and request a review from @oliverguenther.
On every commit, set @oliverguenther as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[klaustopher]

I guess all files need the license header?

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/presentation/meeting_presentation_mode_spec.rb[1:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/project_creation_wizard_spec.rb[1:11:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/wizard_from_template_flow_spec.rb[1:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #25163, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/presentation/meeting_presentation_mode_spec.rb[1:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/project_creation_wizard_spec.rb[1:11:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/wizard_from_template_flow_spec.rb[1:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #25163. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #25163 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @oliverguenther to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @oliverguenther, and request a review from @oliverguenther.
On every commit, set @oliverguenther as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[oliverguenther]

@klaustopher I went through all changed files and made sure the header is there

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:2:1]
• rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/meeting_notifications_spec.rb[1:2:1]
• rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/meeting_notifications_spec.rb[1:2:2]
• rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_spec.rb[1:7:6]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #25163, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:2:1]`
- `rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/meeting_notifications_spec.rb[1:2:1]`
- `rspec ./modules/meeting/spec/features/meeting_notifications_spec.rb[1:2:2]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_spec.rb[1:7:6]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #25163. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #25163 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @oliverguenther to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @oliverguenther, and request a review from @oliverguenther.
On every commit, set @oliverguenther as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[dfriquet]

I haven’t reviewed the specs yet, but here is a first pass over the first 69 files.

[dfriquet]

Here is the second review, for the specs folder here. Nice opportunity for a specs-linting pass instead of just renaming 👍

One suggestion for the factory, and one change to drop entirely.

[oliverguenther]

@dfriquet Finally managed to address your review feedback, thanks 👍

[dfriquet]

Latest changes reviewed 👍

One blocker before the merge: CI is failing on a automation specs — seems legit, not flaky.

One comment wannabe blocker: acts_as_list removal is not complete for triggers, cf my latest comment.