♻️ Splits models_library.services

[pcrespov]

What do these changes do?

• ♻️ Splits models_library.services into more manageable sub-modules. This is the rationale
  • the module/submodules follow a structure similar to e.g. aiohttp
    • models_library.services acts as the main module API
    • models_library.services_* act as submodules. Can be either imported directly and/or some functionality is exposed to the main module API
  • highlights differences between different service metadata (SMD) models and how they are composed. We have SMD models for:
    1. image (static)
    2. database (user-defined, editable)
    3. webserver API schema ( GET/PATCH )
    4. catalog API schema ( GET/PATCH )
• 🔨 new make doc-uml on any package to produce UML diagrams. Based in pyreverse which comes with pylint.

Related issue/s

• resolves Split models_library.services #3486
• preparation for Sim4Life-Web dy-service versioning osparc-issues#1404

How to test

• Using doc-uml to trace code inhertance/composition relations between models
  • cd packages/models-library (or any other package/service)
  • make -n doc-uml
  • (export DOC_UML_PATH_SUFFIX="services*"; export DOC_UML_CLASS=models_library.api_schemas_catalog.services.ServiceGet; make doc-uml)
  • will produce a UML diagram

Dev-ops checklist

None

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 93.02326% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 88.2%. Comparing base (cafbf96) to head (aa360be).
Report is 276 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #5921      +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage    84.5%   88.2%    +3.6%     
=========================================
  Files          10    1165    +1155     
  Lines         214   50810   +50596     
  Branches       25     573     +548     
=========================================
+ Hits          181   44827   +44646     
- Misses         23    5860    +5837     
- Partials       10     123     +113     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	63.1% <93.7%> (?)
unittests	86.1% <93.0%> (+1.5%)	⬆️

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

Files	Coverage Δ
...src/dask_task_models_library/container_tasks/io.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...src/models_library/api_schemas_catalog/services.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...s/models-library/src/models_library/basic_regex.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...rc/models_library/function_services_catalog/api.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...y/function_services_catalog/services/demo_units.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
.../function_services_catalog/services/file_picker.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...y/function_services_catalog/services/iter_range.py	82.3% <100.0%> (ø)
...tion_services_catalog/services/iter_sensitivity.py	51.7% <100.0%> (ø)
.../function_services_catalog/services/nodes_group.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
...y/function_services_catalog/services/parameters.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
... and 32 more

... and 1124 files with indirect coverage changes

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
11 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.2% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[sanderegg]

all good, you have a service_runtime.py that is empty

[GitHK]

👍

[bisgaard-itis]

Looks good to me. Thanks for the effort!