♻️ Tests bad parsing of jobs custom metadata

[pcrespov]

What do these changes do?

Testing that issue #6556 is not caused on the server side. The problem seems to be related with how the osparc python client serializes the values of the custom metadata.

Probably the client does not use strict types when it serializes the update_metadata body.

Will follow up with a fix in the client in PR ITISFoundation/osparc-simcore-clients#192

Related issue/s

• checking API-server: returned values when setting metadata are wrong #6556
• client fix in WIP: is6556/api-metadata-wrong-return osparc-simcore-clients#192

How to test

cd services/api-server
make install-dev
pytest -v test_models_schema_jobs

Dev-ops checklist

None

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 66.8%. Comparing base (cafbf96) to head (37e1c06).
Report is 648 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #6559      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    84.5%   66.8%   -17.8%     
=========================================
  Files          10     686     +676     
  Lines         214   33537   +33323     
  Branches       25     265     +240     
=========================================
+ Hits          181   22410   +22229     
- Misses         23   11066   +11043     
- Partials       10      61      +51     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	64.7% <ø> (?)
unittests	89.8% <100.0%> (+5.2%)	⬆️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
.../simcore_service_api_server/models/schemas/jobs.py	96.5% <100.0%> (ø)

... and 695 files with indirect coverage changes

[matusdrobuliak66]

👍

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[sanderegg]

thanks!