Issues around direct publishing

[FynnBe]

There was a recent change that a reviewer's accept action does not dispatch the publish collection workflow, but renames the file on S3 directly instead.
@oeway , I know we talked about it, and yes the workflow mainly only renames the folder, but I gave it some more thought and would argue that we should definitely go via the workflow dispatch again because:

1. single source of truth; if anything in the publish process changes we have to keep these two avenues in sync
2. they have not been in sync so far as there are these differences: the collection workflow...
   • updates the collection.json which is ultimately what is shown on the website
   • writes to the log (updates the log files with the accepted status and then the published status)
   • afterwards triggers the backup workflow to backup to zenodo and generate a DOI (this is also done once a week on a schedule, so this is just causing a delay to get the DOI for the published wf)
     these changes can of course be fixed, but I want to stress again that this needs fixing only because we have issue number 1.
3. I don't think a 3 min delay from a reviewer accepting a resource to it being published matter all too much. Given that the uploader will typically have to wait for the review longer than x minutes anyway...

[oeway]

I agree that we should always go via a workflow dispatch. Also, it doesn't really matter, whatever way we decided please just update the bioimageio_collection_backoffice, the backend just call the publish function anyway.