change wording of the client side storage handling

[bgruening]

We are trying to roll out advanced storage configurations on EU. Initial user feedback showed that:

remote file source is confusing. In particular, the source was not clear in cases where you can export to a source. It was also confusing that most of the remote file source were labelled storage.

storage location was not distinct enough to remote file source, so people told us they would expect Dropbox under this section. We considered a few options, but in the end, we think the distinguishing concept is the fact that 1) Galaxy is managing storage (quota, create, delete, permissions) vs. 2) users import and export to an external "thing".

This external "thing" we would like to call a repository from now on in the frontend. We think it's totally fine to call it differently in the backend and be more technical in the backend.

storage location we would like to call Galaxy storage or simply storage (in a few places where the Galaxy prefix does not fit). Galaxy should indicate that the storage is managed by Galaxy. In contrast, we have My repositories.

An additional change is that I removed the word template in the file-source-templates. I think "template" is also a technical artefact that is not relevant to the user.

Please let us know what you think.

[jmchilton]

I'd love if a UX person looked over this but I think the switch is broadly fine by me. The failing client unit test is also a relevant failure.

[davelopez]

If you are fine with the wording I'll go and try to fix the tests 👍

[davelopez]

The rest of the failures are unrelated and failing in other PRs too.

[bgruening]

THanks a lot @davelopez!