Update functions and triggers

[ponceta]

General

• Fix a bug
• Add a feature
• Maintenance / sustainability
• Add Documentation

Describe your changes

This aims to fix #485

• Rename symbology_on_reach_delete into modification_on_reach_delete
• Reorganize files in application (draft)

Screenshots

Issue ticket number and link

#485

Checklist before requesting a review

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.
• CI Tests are green
• The documentation is up to date with the proposed change.
• My work is ready for review

Checklist before merge

• A review has been performed
• Comments are resolved
• Documentation is ready

[ponceta]

@domi4484 @cymed @3nids could you review it :

• From the code organisation perspective (good / bad / what to adapt?)
• From the functions content (are the actual functions clear enough, should they be adapted into smaller pieces?)
• Should we separate triggers from functions (as proposed) ?
• Should we separate trigger functions from functions ?
• From the upgrade mechanics perspective (9A/9B)

This is already great because a single python instruction can rebuild the whole app and the whole app is cleaned by dropping cascade the app schema

[domi4484]

@ponceta from the code perspective it looks good to me.
For the other questions I am missing some postgres expertise to anwer yet.
In any case whatever comes out from the other questions, this changes doesn't put any limit in future decisions and should be safe to merge

[3nids]

Apart from the trigger file creation, this looks good to me.

I am not sure if I missed something important regarding this, but the main point is function renaming to clearly separate symbology from core netowrk business logic, is this correct?

[3nids]

I'm not a fan of separating the code which create the trigger from the ones which create the trigger functions.