[FTR][Ownership] add @elastic/response-ops to es archives

[wayneseymour]

Summary

Modify code owner declarations for @elastic/response-ops team in .github/CODEOWNERS

Update for Reviewers

With the merge of this, you can now do this:
node scripts/get_owners_for_file.js --file x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/action_task_params

 succ elastic/response-ops

So, you can use this script to see if the code owners file is reporting erroneously

For Reviewers

Added these lines:

/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/actions @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/alerting @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/alerts @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/alerts_legacy @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/observability/alerts @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/actions @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/rules_scheduled_task_id  @elastic/response-ops
/x-pack/test/functional/es_archives/alerting/8_2_0  @elastic/response-ops

Most of these changes come from searching for esArchiver.load, within x-pack/test/alerting_api_integration
Obviously this can easily be erroneous, so please keep me honest.

Notes

This is a best guess effort, as we march towards having zero files within test && x-pack/test && x-pack/test_serverless without a code owner.

In the end, this will contribute to better reporting.

Contribues to: #192979

[wayneseymour]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[wayneseymour]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[wayneseymour]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[pmuellr]

LGTM

[kibana-ci]

💚 Build Succeeded

• Buildkite Build
• Commit: 09eaa00

Metrics [docs]

✅ unchanged

History

• 💛 Build #235840 was flaky 423dc84
• 💛 Build #235710 was flaky 7ca2154

To update your PR or re-run it, just comment with:
@elasticmachine merge upstream

cc @wayneseymour