Remove flaky Notebooks tests

[Polber]

This PR removes the flaky screenshots tests from Notebooks IT suite.

---

Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

• Mention the appropriate issue in your description (for example: addresses #123), if applicable. This will automatically add a link to the pull request in the issue. If you would like the issue to automatically close on merging the pull request, comment fixes #<ISSUE NUMBER> instead.
• Update CHANGES.md with noteworthy changes.
• If this contribution is large, please file an Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement.

See the Contributor Guide for more tips on how to make review process smoother.

To check the build health, please visit https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/BUILD_STATUS.md

GitHub Actions Tests Status (on master branch)

See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI or the workflows README to see a list of phrases to trigger workflows.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (3f434f0) 38.32% compared to head (e8266bc) 38.32%.
Report is 435 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #29217   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   38.32%   38.32%           
=======================================
  Files         688      688           
  Lines      101846   101846           
=======================================
  Hits        39032    39032           
  Misses      61233    61233           
  Partials     1581     1581           

Flag	Coverage Δ
python	29.93% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

Assigning reviewers. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @jrmccluskey for label python.

Available commands:

• stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
• remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
• waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments).

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @jrmccluskey

[github-actions]

Assigning new set of reviewers because Pr has gone too long without review. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @damccorm for label python.

Available commands:

• stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
• remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
• waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

[damccorm]

Could you give some context on this? Where have we seen the flakes? Do we have adequate coverage without this?

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @damccorm

[damccorm]

waiting on author

[Polber]

@damccorm These flakes block notebooks release and perform no real testing of the code itself. They essentially test the fonts and formatting of the output of the notebook cells

[damccorm]

Are there actually other tests in https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/3f434f07053d5a73be202cb6d7d70abca200f463/sdks/python/apache_beam/runners/interactive/testing

I ask for 2 reasons:

1. I'm hesitant to remove our primary source of testing of this code if it is just this
2. If they are and we decide to remove this, should we just remove the whole folder?

@damccorm These flakes block notebooks release and perform no real testing of the code itself. They essentially test the fonts and formatting of the output of the notebook cells

That is testing something, even if its not the most effective test for that. Do we understand why they're flaky? Is it something that could be fixed? cc/ @kevingg who may have thoughts here

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @damccorm

[Polber]

Closing as these tests have not been an issue in a while.