GraphQL-based quilt3.admin API

[sir-sigurd]

Description

TODO

• better exceptions
• fix ImportError: cannot import name 'Annotated' from 'typing' (drop Python 3.8?)
• wrap dates?
• docstrings
• type docstrings
• adminql -> admin
• add requirements.txt
• CI
• Unit tests
• Documentation
  • Python: Run build.py for new docstrings
• Changelog entry (skip if change is not significant to end users, e.g. docs only)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.25911% with 87 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 37.46%. Comparing base (64e081c) to head (e38e644).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...python/quilt3/admin/_graphql_client/base_client.py	26.74%	63 Missing ⚠️
.../python/quilt3/admin/_graphql_client/exceptions.py	55.00%	18 Missing ⚠️
.../python/quilt3/admin/_graphql_client/base_model.py	69.23%	4 Missing ⚠️
api/python/quilt3/admin/users.py	98.03%	1 Missing ⚠️
api/python/tests/test_admin_api.py	98.98%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3990      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   36.68%   37.46%   +0.77%     
==========================================
  Files         724      746      +22     
  Lines       32254    32717     +463     
  Branches     4773     4604     -169     
==========================================
+ Hits        11833    12256     +423     
- Misses      19259    19798     +539     
+ Partials     1162      663     -499     

Flag	Coverage Δ
api-python	90.62% <88.25%> (-0.33%)	⬇️
catalog	10.71% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
lambda	88.18% <ø> (+0.21%)	⬆️

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

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

[drernie]

This looks great! I assume in the final version it will be something like "quilt3.admin"; 'adminql' is too much information

My main concern is that I find the name and type of "role" confusing; when do I use a role_id vs a role_name?

Is it possible to:

• standardize on only one
• change the argument names to be clearer which is which
• make the type explicit enough to distinguish (rather than just "str")

[sir-sigurd]

CI currently fail because of jd/tenacity#471

[sir-sigurd]

@nl0
does it make sense to rename some functions
set_role -> set_user_role
add_roles -> add_user_roles
remove_roles -> remove_user_roles
?

or maybe use prefixes for consistency? i.e.

get_user -> user_get
get_users -> user_list
set_role -> user_set_role
?

[nl0]

does it make sense to rename some functions?

yeah i think so

or maybe use prefixes for consistency? i.e.

that feels like a good intent, but the resulting names don't look too nice, so... your call.
imo it would look nice if we had some sort of a namespace (e.g. admin.users.list or smth, idk)

[sir-sigurd]

imo it would look nice if we had some sort of a namespace (e.g. admin.users.list or smth, idk)

I made this change

[nl0]

looks good