decide testing best practice: dep package versions

[atravitz]

this feedstock build test is failing because:

• a change was made in cinnabar v0.6.0 (ordering of the ligand names)
• openfe main now builds with cinnabar 0.6.0 and has updated its tests accordingly
• feedstock cron CI is still building based on the feedstock specs (i.e. pulling cinnabar 0.5.0)

This is a case we've run into before and I expect us to run into again, so I'd like to decide a standard.

Options include:

1. leave as-is, leaving this CI red until we release the next version of openfe.

   I don't love this, as I'd like to have "green CI" be an expected achievable state for the main openfe repo.

2. move this test to openfe-canary, where we are okay with the CI being red as an indicator of the state of the ecosystem. In this case, a reminder that we will need to bump the feedstock dependency when releasing openfe on conda-forge next.

   I'm okay with this, but we should put in our release checklist to refer to openfe-canary

3. update the feedstock build tests to use the dependencies we anticipate for the next release. In this case, we would bump the cinnabar version for feedstock tests to 0.6.0.

   I don't like this as something to live in openfe, but if there's a clean way to do it in openfe-canary (maybe make a standing PR with dep updates on the feedstock side that it references?), I wouldn't mind it so much. But it sounds fragile to me.

[mikemhenry]

I think the feedstock cron should live in openfe-canary since it may catch issues that have nothing to do with the openfe repo. I think we want to keep CI green on openfe so moving some checks to openfe-canary (like this one) makes sense to me.

To track issue with the feedstock recipe, I like to make issues on the feedstock repo since then it makes it really easy to check if there are any "issues" we can close with the next feedstock release. Those repos tend to have very few issues, so it is easy to check things.