fix(amber): include requester name in account email

[anthonychengit]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

The account-request notification only forwarded the requester's email address to the template. Although the stored user record already contains the requester's name, the notification path never retrieved it.

Before: account request -> email only -> admin notification omits name
After:  account request -> stored user lookup -> admin receives name and email

This change looks up the stored requester by email and includes the name in the admin notification. Missing or blank names render as Not provided. The requester-facing acknowledgement remains unchanged and does not expose the name field.

Tests cover the positive stored-name path, the missing-requester fallback, blank and absent names, and the negative requester-facing template case.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #7595

How was this PR tested?

sbt "WorkflowExecutionService / Test / testOnly org.apache.texera.web.resource.EmailTemplateSpec org.apache.texera.web.resource.GmailResourceSpec"
sbt scalafmtCheckAll
sbt "scalafixAll --check"

The focused suite passed 12 tests. Scala formatting and Scalafix checks also passed.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: OpenAI Codex (GPT-5)

[github-actions]

Backport auto-label report

This fix: PR was checked against each actively-supported release branch. release/* labels drive the post-merge backport, so add or remove one to change where this fix lands.

Release branch	Analysis
✅ release/v1.2	Change detected on this branch — label added; this fix is queued to backport here. Requested review from @xuang7.

Auto-label run.

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @Ma77Ball, @Yicong-Huang, @aglinxinyuan
  You can notify them by mentioning @Ma77Ball, @Yicong-Huang, @aglinxinyuan in a comment.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 3 worse · ⚪ 10 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 12169c2 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	441	0.269	22,380/29,775/29,775 us	🔴 +16.5% / 🔴 +82.1%
⚪	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	952	0.581	104,314/124,033/124,033 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 +15.3%
🟢	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,114	0.68	898,392/933,926/933,926 us	🟢 -7.9% / 🟢 -12.8%

Baseline details

Latest main 12169c2 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	441 tuples/sec	485 tuples/sec	774.89 tuples/sec	-9.1%	-43.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.269 MB/s	0.296 MB/s	0.473 MB/s	-9.1%	-43.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	22,380 us	19,203 us	12,738 us	+16.5%	+75.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	29,775 us	29,305 us	16,348 us	+1.6%	+82.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	29,775 us	29,305 us	18,848 us	+1.6%	+58.0%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	952 tuples/sec	973 tuples/sec	1,005 tuples/sec	-2.2%	-5.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.581 MB/s	0.594 MB/s	0.613 MB/s	-2.2%	-5.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	104,314 us	102,031 us	100,970 us	+2.2%	+3.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	124,033 us	127,959 us	107,605 us	-3.1%	+15.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	124,033 us	127,959 us	116,429 us	-3.1%	+6.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,114 tuples/sec	1,098 tuples/sec	1,030 tuples/sec	+1.5%	+8.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.68 MB/s	0.67 MB/s	0.629 MB/s	+1.5%	+8.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	898,392 us	900,842 us	991,433 us	-0.3%	-9.4%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	933,926 us	1,014,537 us	1,036,668 us	-7.9%	-9.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	933,926 us	1,014,537 us	1,070,470 us	-7.9%	-12.8%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,454.00,200,128000,441,0.269,22380.36,29774.59,29774.59
1,100,10,64,20,2101.48,2000,1280000,952,0.581,104314.27,124032.66,124032.66
2,1000,10,64,20,17950.67,20000,12800000,1114,0.680,898391.53,933925.76,933925.76

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 81.81818% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.67%. Comparing base (12169c2) to head (79cd5c5).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...org/apache/texera/web/resource/GmailResource.scala	80.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7639      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     89.65%   89.67%   +0.02%     
- Complexity     4397     4400       +3     
============================================
  Files          1177     1177              
  Lines         46996    47001       +5     
  Branches       5268     5268              
============================================
+ Hits          42136    42150      +14     
+ Misses         3094     3088       -6     
+ Partials       1766     1763       -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
agent-service	98.62% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
amber	86.40% <81.81%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
computing-unit-managing-service	72.46% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
config-service	77.31% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
file-service	68.90% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
frontend	90.67% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
notebook-migration-service	78.89% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
pyamber	97.57% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2
workflow-compiling-service	57.89% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 12169c2

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.