🎨 web-server api: ordering parameters and simplified openapi specs for complex query parameters

[pcrespov]

What do these changes do?

Unifies and simplifies ordering queries. For instance, list folders is displayed as

from this coded openapi specification

@router.get(
    "/folders",
    response_model=Envelope[list[FolderGet]],
)
async def list_folders(
    _q: Annotated[as_query(FolderListQueryParams), Depends()],
):
    ...    

♻️ Unified ordering query parameters

• SEE packages/models-library/src/models_library/rest_ordering.py
• Introduced a factory function to streamline the handling of ordering parameters, ensuring flexibility for customization per case.
• Refactored existing resources (folders, projects, ...) to adopt the unified approach for defining ordering parameters.
• Established a naming convention for models: $(ResourceName)$(OperationName)OrderQueryParams (e.g., FoldersListOrderQueryParams).

♻️ Simplified handling of complex query parameters (i.e. JSON-encoded)

• Unified the logic with a single class for both OpenAPI specification generation and request validation.
  • Includes the helper function as_query for ease of use
• Improved implementation in api/specs/web-server to reduce complexity and potential errors.. E.g. openapi specs are simply defined using one model per "group" of parameters
• Note that it uses dependency injection shortcuts to expand all fields in the model as (path _p/ query _q) parameters.

Related issue/s

• Preparations to include ordering in Feature to undo a delete - "recycle bin" style osparc-issues#468

How to test

Driving test

cd pakcages/models-library
make install-dev
pytest -vv tests/test_rest_ordering

Dev-ops

None

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.68085% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 85.70%. Comparing base (5f70a0d) to head (d85312a).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6737      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.33%   85.70%   -2.63%     
==========================================
  Files        1440     1573     +133     
  Lines       58398    63309    +4911     
  Branches     1405     2125     +720     
==========================================
+ Hits        51583    54257    +2674     
- Misses       6615     8739    +2124     
- Partials      200      313     +113     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	?
unittests	85.70% <94.68%> (-0.80%)	⬇️

Components	Coverage Δ
api	79.60% <ø> (ø)
pkg_aws_library	93.38% <ø> (ø)
pkg_dask_task_models_library	96.87% <ø> (ø)
pkg_models_library	91.93% <85.71%> (-0.09%)	⬇️
pkg_notifications_library	83.79% <ø> (ø)
pkg_postgres_database	87.33% <ø> (ø)
pkg_service_integration	71.44% <ø> (ø)
pkg_service_library	76.54% <100.00%> (∅)
pkg_settings_library	91.42% <ø> (ø)
pkg_simcore_sdk	65.69% <ø> (-19.58%)	⬇️
agent	96.98% <ø> (ø)
api_server	89.88% <ø> (ø)
autoscaling	95.22% <ø> (ø)
catalog	89.42% <ø> (ø)
clusters_keeper	98.72% <ø> (ø)
dask_sidecar	91.32% <ø> (ø)
datcore_adapter	94.05% <ø> (ø)
director	58.38% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
director_v2	84.32% <ø> (-6.51%)	⬇️
dynamic_scheduler	96.59% <ø> (ø)
dynamic_sidecar	88.83% <ø> (-0.95%)	⬇️
efs_guardian	90.01% <ø> (ø)
invitations	93.51% <ø> (ø)
osparc_gateway_server	39.84% <ø> (-45.58%)	⬇️
payments	92.87% <ø> (ø)
resource_usage_tracker	90.65% <ø> (-0.15%)	⬇️
storage	89.76% <ø> (ø)
webclient	∅ <ø> (∅)
webserver	87.23% <98.46%> (-0.36%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f70a0d...d85312a. Read the comment docs.

---- 🚨 Try these New Features:

• JS Bundle Analysis - Avoid shipping oversized bundles

[sanderegg]

Very nice refactoring.
This is the inverse of parse_as_body/header/param/query methods. nice!
Just a few comments and questions.

[matusdrobuliak66]

Thanks so much! It’s really nice. I’ve left a few comments.

[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 SonarQube Cloud