Fix and add new README badges

[andrea-pasquale]

I've fixed the tests badge and I've also added others badges. We can even drop some of them I just wanted to make the README look nicer. I could also propagate some of those changes to the other repos.

Checklist:

• [ ] Reviewers confirm new code works as expected.
• [ ] Tests are passing.
• [ ] Coverage does not decrease.
• [ ] Documentation is updated.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (154aab0) 63.97% compared to head (2578bb2) 63.97%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #788 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 63.97% 63.97% ======================================= Files 49 49 Lines 5773 5773 ======================================= Hits 3693 3693 Misses 2080 2080 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/788/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/788/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | `63.97% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[alecandido]

@andrea-pasquale I abused your branch to make a further proposal (based on yours), it was easier showing than describing. The motivations are in the commit message.

If you don't like it, feel free to revert.

[alecandido]

Btw, the citation policy section is pointing to Qibo, where (correctly?) the Qibolab paper is not listed.

We should decide if keeping each package references separate, and then update those that or not Qibo, or otherwise update Qibo with (at least) the Qibolab paper. @scarrazza

[andrea-pasquale]

@andrea-pasquale I abused your branch to make a further proposal (based on yours), it was easier showing than describing. The motivations are in the commit message.

If you don't like it, feel free to revert.

I like your proposal. I wanted to start a discussion to see which ones we should keep and which one we can remove. Perhaps I would add again tests, codefactor also would be nice but I think that people probably don't care.

[alecandido]

Perhaps I would add again tests, codefactor also would be nice but I think that people probably don't care.

Feel free :)

(for Codefactor in particular, I personally feel a bit guilty, given the amount of ignored Pylint warnings...)

[alecandido]

Thanks for fixing this @andrea-pasquale. Personally I would add at least the "tests" badge because we have it in other repositories, but either way is fine with me.

@stavros11 the idea of @andrea-pasquale (if I understood correctly), was to make a proposal to then propagate to the other repos as well. So, it would be fine to have something different (for the time being).

I proposed to have only Codecov, because if Codecov is working tests are passing (they are related to the same topic). But if you want to have it explicit, just add it.

[andrea-pasquale]

@stavros11 the idea of @andrea-pasquale (if I understood correctly), was to make a proposal to then propagate to the other repos as well. So, it would be fine to have something different (for the time being).

Indeed, I will propagate these changes to all our repos. Regarding tests in theory we should also be able to see if tests are passing or no by checking the last commit which is always shown on GitHub therefore it might be redundant also for this reason.