🐛 archiving_utils creates deterministic zip archives

[GitHK]

What do these changes do?

When creating a zip archive its hash would not be the same if ran twice on the same input files. Reasons:

• files were not added in the same order (even though python sorting is deterministic in the same interpreter process, if the interpreter is restart this is no longer guaranteed)
• datetimes are also used in zip archives which complicates thing even more

These changes make it so that the produced archive will be deterministic. This allows different python interpreters to produce the same archive out of the same files (if their content does not change).

Related issue/s

• Use deterministic zipping for inputs/outputs folders #6244
• closes make zipping in simcore-sdk deterministic #6474

How to test

Dev-ops checklist

• No ENV changes or I properly updated ENV (read the instruction)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.21053% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.9%. Comparing base (cafbf96) to head (a3834d9).
Report is 614 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../service-library/src/servicelib/archiving_utils.py	84.2%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #6472      +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage    84.5%   87.9%    +3.3%     
=========================================
  Files          10    1215    +1205     
  Lines         214   53197   +52983     
  Branches       25    1096    +1071     
=========================================
+ Hits          181   46769   +46588     
- Misses         23    6237    +6214     
- Partials       10     191     +181     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	64.6% <ø> (?)
unittests	85.5% <84.2%> (+0.9%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
.../service-library/src/servicelib/archiving_utils.py	83.2% <84.2%> (ø)

... and 1209 files with indirect coverage changes

[matusdrobuliak66]

Cool. thanks!

[pcrespov]

thx!
When @giancarloromeo reviews it, since @sanderegg is not here, i can force-merge it when you tell me

[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 SonarCloud