Refactor config docs

[oyvindeide]

Issue
Build keyword reference based on json schema instead of custom function. This allows us to support all levels of nesting as well as supported types.

NOTE: In this PR I remove the checked in created config, which means we will not get a diff if there are changes to the json schema. This could potentially mean that we miss breaking changes, though we should probably rely on the configuration tests for this, rather than the schema. We could of course check in the json schema and use the old test functions for that instead of the rst code. That implies that we would need to update the json schema when for example adding a new example.

Related to: #9486

Approach

Use a framework for creating the keyword reference from the json schema, which then looks like:

This has a number of benefits, for example it supports the full config, with arbitrary nesting, as well as examples:

Compared with the current:

• PR title captures the intent of the changes, and is fitting for release notes.
• Added appropriate release note label
• Commit history is consistent and clean, in line with the contribution guidelines.
• Make sure unit tests pass locally after every commit (git rebase -i main --exec 'pytest tests/ert/unit_tests -n logical -m "not integration_test"')

When applicable

• When there are user facing changes: Updated documentation
• New behavior or changes to existing untested code: Ensured that unit tests are added (See Ground Rules).
• Large PR: Prepare changes in small commits for more convenient review
• Bug fix: Add regression test for the bug
• Bug fix: Create Backport PR to latest release

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #9610 will improve performances by 10.93%

_{Comparing oyvindeide:refactor_config_docs (9b67b15) with main (ead6423)}

Summary

⚡ 1 improvements
✅ 23 untouched benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	main	oyvindeide:refactor_config_docs	Change
⚡	test_direct_dark_performance_with_storage[gen_x: 20, sum_x: 20 reals: 10-gen_data-get_record_observations]	1.7 ms	1.5 ms	+10.93%

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.88%. Comparing base (1889e2a) to head (9b67b15).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9610      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.85%   91.88%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         433      430       -3     
  Lines       26813    26694     -119     
==========================================
- Hits        24630    24528     -102     
+ Misses       2183     2166      -17     

Flag	Coverage Δ
cli-tests	39.74% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
everest-models-test	34.60% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
gui-tests	72.10% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
integration-test	38.51% <100.00%> (-0.23%)	⬇️
performance-tests	51.94% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
test	39.91% <100.00%> (-0.18%)	⬇️
unit-tests	74.34% <100.00%> (+0.20%)	⬆️

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.