feat: Convert config template to pydantic model

[romeonicholas]

Resolves #1165 by replacing the configuration template with a pydantic object from which default configurations can be written.

• Attempting to launch the app without a configuration file will now automatically generate a configuration
• The application loads the configuration as a pydantic object, and all existing references to the YAML have been switched over to using the python object attributes instead
• The new model uses snake case naming conventions for attributes, with camel case aliases for writing to YAML (this is done automatically for all attributes, but a few require manual aliasing for some common acronyms)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 85.39326% with 26 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 75.86%. Comparing base (d6decd0) to head (66728d2).

Files	Patch %	Lines
...acollab/core/authentication/provider/oauth/flow.py	40.00%	5 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...lab/core/authentication/provider/azure/keystore.py	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...lab/core/authentication/provider/azure/__main__.py	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
...ollab/core/authentication/provider/azure/routes.py	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
backend/capellacollab/sessions/operators/k8s.py	72.72%	1 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
backend/capellacollab/__main__.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
backend/capellacollab/config/__init__.py	75.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...nd/capellacollab/core/authentication/jwt_bearer.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...lab/core/authentication/provider/oauth/keystore.py	80.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
backend/capellacollab/core/database/migration.py	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1364      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.03%   75.86%   +0.83%     
==========================================
  Files         169      170       +1     
  Lines        5675     5738      +63     
  Branches      659      659              
==========================================
+ Hits         4258     4353      +95     
+ Misses       1268     1238      -30     
+ Partials      149      147       -2     

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

[romeonicholas]

I'm definitely doing something wrong here but I'm not familiar with yaml.
@MoritzWeber0 my yaml output is currently looking like this, do you think I'm doing something wrong in my classes or in deriving the yaml from the classes?:
(the function generating the yaml is just at the bottom of config_template.py for now)

docker: !!python/name:__main__.DockerConfig ''
k8s: !!python/name:__main__.K8sConfig ''
general: !!python/name:__main__.GeneralConfig ''
extensions: !!python/name:__main__.ExtensionsConfig ''
...
...

[MoritzWeber0]

I'm definitely doing something wrong here but I'm not familiar with yaml. @MoritzWeber0 my yaml output is currently looking like this, do you think I'm doing something wrong in my classes or in deriving the yaml from the classes?: (the function generating the yaml is just at the bottom of config_template.py for now)

docker: !!python/name:__main__.DockerConfig ''
k8s: !!python/name:__main__.K8sConfig ''
general: !!python/name:__main__.GeneralConfig ''
extensions: !!python/name:__main__.ExtensionsConfig ''
...
...

Use app_config.model_dump() instead app_config.__dict__

[romeonicholas]

Perfect, thanks @MoritzWeber0, I switched to BaseModels so I could use model_dump() and now it's almost correct, just need to tweak a few fields I entered incorrectly. Last question would be: how do we present or implement this for the user?

• Easiest to implement but most work for the end user: just update the documentation to say something like "you can run the following command to generate your config before first launch" as part of the setup process
• Hardest to implement but easiest for the user: automatically generate a config based off the template if they don't have one (where would that happen? The Makefile?)

Option A would obviously only take me a few minutes, I'd need a little starting direction for Option B so I knew where to look.

[MoritzWeber0]

Perfect, thanks @MoritzWeber0, I switched to BaseModels so I could use model_dump() and now it's almost correct, just need to tweak a few fields I entered incorrectly. Last question would be: how do we present or implement this for the user?

• Easiest to implement but most work for the end user: just update the documentation to say something like "you can run the following command to generate your config before first launch" as part of the setup process
• Hardest to implement but easiest for the user: automatically generate a config based off the template if they don't have one (where would that happen? The Makefile?)

Option A would obviously only take me a few minutes, I'd need a little starting direction for Option B so I knew where to look.

Go for option A:

• If no config file exists in the list of places, fail during startup. Log an error message how to generate the config file.
• Add a CLI option (we already have an CLI interface for config.diff) to generate the config file based on the default values.

[MoritzWeber0]

Thanks @romeonicholas. This is one of the best PRs of this year and will significantly improve my life. Finally, we have typing of the configuration.

I love the precision of changes and the accurate descriptions and examples. I did some changes and added conversations for it, but everything is already resolved. It's just for transparency what I've changed.

Tested on staging and works like a dream.

I'd just refactor the tests slightly: Instead of using unittest mock, I'd switch to Python classes which have typing and autocomplete.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
2 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud