feat: models for custom config validation

[Nidhi091999]

Resolves #164

Summary by Sourcery

Implement custom configuration validation using Pydantic models.

New Features:

• Define Pydantic models for different configuration sections (Controllers, Tes, StoreLogs, Middlewares, ServiceInfo).
• Enable custom configuration validation within the Foca application setup.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This pull request introduces custom configuration validation using Pydantic models. A new file pro_tes/config_models.py is added to define these models, and the application initialization in pro_tes/app.py is updated to use the custom configuration model.

No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Implement custom application configuration validation using Pydantic models.	Create pro_tes/config_models.py to define Pydantic models for application configuration, including models for controllers, TES backend, logging, and middlewares. Define CustomConfig model in pro_tes/config_models.py to represent the overall application configuration structure. Modify pro_tes/app.py to register the CustomConfig model with the Foca application instance using the custom_config_model parameter.	pro_tes/config_models.py pro_tes/app.py

Assessment against linked issues

Issue	Objective	Addressed	Explanation
#164	Implement the models in file pro_wes/config_models.py.	✅
#164	Pass the models to Foca() constructor in pro_wes/app.py.	✅

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @Nidhi091999 - I've reviewed your changes and found some issues that need to be addressed.

Blocking issues:

• Hardcoded boolean value for execution trace logs. (link)

Overall Comments:

• The Pydantic models in config_models.py appear to contain YAML snippets instead of valid field definitions and nested models.
• Consider using snake_case (e.g., store_logs) for attribute names within the CustomConfig model for consistency with Python conventions.

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟡 General issues: 3 issues found
• 🔴 Security: 1 blocking issue
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟡 Complexity: 1 issue found
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[uniqueg]

Thanks a lot, @Nidhi091999 - as far as I can tell, the models look fine now. However, there are 3 issues remaining:

1. The app configuration now needs to be updated to include a custom section, which is required to activate the validation. The sections defining the values for custom config params, like controllers, serviceInfo and so on (see https://github.com/elixir-cloud-aai/proTES/blob/f83c3e3cd10eef83829c9f1359830a0d99f4299a/pro_tes/config.yaml#L109C1-L149C84 for all of them) need to children of section custom.
2. Given that the new custom section changes the paths under which these params can be found when used in the app, all code referencing any params in the custom section need to be updated accordingly, e.g., from current_app.config.foca.tes["service_list"] to current_app.config.foca.custom.tes["service_list"]
3. The integration tests are currently failing. I am not sure why that is, but possibly it is because currently there is no custom section in pro_tes/config.yaml; so possibly, if you fix point 1 above (which in turns requires addressing point 2), this problem might resolve itself. If not, please try to add some debug statements to see why the tests are failing with the new models.