feat: add more convenience targets

[jjmaestro]

Add platform-aware :data and :control convenience targets at the top of the package repo so that we can use @<REPO>//<PACKAGE>:data directly. See changes to examples/debian_snapshot/BUILD:

diff --git a/examples/debian_snapshot/BUILD.bazel b/examples/debian_snapshot/BUILD.bazel
index 88b98ba..298c261 100644
--- a/examples/debian_snapshot/BUILD.bazel
+++ b/examples/debian_snapshot/BUILD.bazel
@@ -58,10 +58,7 @@ tar(
 
 cacerts(
     name = "cacerts",
-    package = select({
-        "@platforms//cpu:arm64": "@bullseye//ca-certificates/arm64:data",
-        "@platforms//cpu:x86_64": "@bullseye//ca-certificates/amd64:data",
-    }),
+    package = "@bullseye//ca-certificates:data",
 )
 
 oci_image(

Also, add :deps to complement :data.

Finally, with the changes in #115 and the previous commit, we can now remove a bunch of select from the examples and use the new target aliases.

NOTE: This PR adds to #115 some functionality that I had in #100 and we can close #100 completely.

[jjmaestro]

@thesayyn sorry for the noise :( I'll back out the rebase and pull the last fix that changes the architecture map into a separate PR.

[jjmaestro]

@thesayyn the noise comes from the stacked PRs, when I rebased this PR on top of #120, I didn't realize it would make it much harder to review 😞

I'm used to stacked PRs and rebases "just working" and GH is pretty terrible when it comes to this, I didn't realize it would dump all of the contents from your PR in here as changes :-/

Can you review #120 first? That PR is all straight-forward fixes, I hope it's easier to review.

Otherwise, you can focus on just this two commits::

• b953eb7 - feat: add more convenience targets
• 5c38a79 - chore: remove select() from the examples

[jjmaestro]

OK, I managed to back out the rebase, this PR is now "clean" and separate from #120.

I'm really really sorry for all the noise, I'm still getting used to working with GH's limitations :(

[jjmaestro]

@thesayyn I've further simplified the PR removing all of the "refactored" methods, so now it's just clear that the PR ditched the _PACKAGE_TEMPLATE in favor of reusing package_template.

Let me know if the PR is to your liking, I'll be happy to make more changes if needed. Thanks.

[jjmaestro]

@thesayyn I'm going to rebase the branch on main to remove the "Conflicting files" message from the threads but you now have the "clean Compares" to check.

Learning to work around GH limitations... 😅

[jjmaestro]

@thesayyn and, again, after I did the two pushes before the rebase, somehow GH is not showing the "Compare" for the two of them, only for the last one (the (...) most recently from (...))!??

This makes it impossible to see the changes I did to address your comments... this is absurd, I really don't know how GH can be failing at this stuff o.0.

Here's my "manual compare link" between the changes: Compare 3327243..b198392.