✅ Extends test_EC2_INSTANCES_ALLOWED_TYPES_empty_not_allowed

[pcrespov]

What do these changes do?

In PR #6701, the test test_EC2_INSTANCES_ALLOWED_TYPES_empty_not_allowed fails with the new Pydantic version, but it unexpectedly passes with the previous version. This PR modifies the test to highlight a bug in our BaseCustomsSettings logic when using Pydantic v1.

The bug originates from a workaround initially applied by @YuryHrytsuk on the refactoring of docker-compose environments (this is also related to this change ITISFoundation/osparc-ops-environments#866), which involved using an empty dictionary {} as an environment variable value to simulate an "unset" state. This workaround impacts fields set with auto-default-factory=True, where empty dicts {} mark fields as UNSET.

In particular, this test case focuses on the field ApplicationSettings.AUTOSCALING_EC2_INSTANCES: EC2InstancesSettings | None, which is a nullable field with an auto-default factory. The test_EC2_INSTANCES_ALLOWED_TYPES_empty_not_allowed test expects the auto-default factory to return None. Instead, it raises a ValidationError because AUTOSCALING_EC2_INSTANCES={} is misinterpreted as a valid assignment instead of as an unset state.

This PR enhances test_EC2_INSTANCES_ALLOWED_TYPES_empty_not_allowed to establish a foundation for the migration to Pydantic v2, as outlined in PR #6701. In this migration, we will address the issue by enforcing that AUTOSCALING_EC2_INSTANCES={} is treated as an explicit assignment rather than an "unset" sentinel.

Related issue/s

• pydantic2 making ported services green #6701

How to test

cd services/autoscaling
make install-dev
pytest -vv tests/unit -k test_EC2_INSTANCES_ALLOWED_TYPES_empty_not_allowed

Dev-ops

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 66.85%. Comparing base (ec1e84e) to head (6b4d346).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (ec1e84e) and HEAD (6b4d346). Click for more details.

HEAD has 30 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (ec1e84e)	HEAD (6b4d346)
unittests	31	1

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6705       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   87.75%   66.85%   -20.91%     
===========================================
  Files        1569      651      -918     
  Lines       63153    33131    -30022     
  Branches     2116      265     -1851     
===========================================
- Hits        55423    22150    -33273     
- Misses       7405    10920     +3515     
+ Partials      325       61      -264     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	64.90% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unittests	87.30% <ø> (+1.57%)	⬆️

Components	Coverage Δ
api	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_aws_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_dask_task_models_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_models_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_notifications_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_postgres_database	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_service_integration	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_service_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_settings_library	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_simcore_sdk	77.44% <ø> (-7.84%)	⬇️
agent	∅ <ø> (∅)
api_server	∅ <ø> (∅)
autoscaling	95.21% <ø> (ø)
catalog	∅ <ø> (∅)
clusters_keeper	∅ <ø> (∅)
dask_sidecar	∅ <ø> (∅)
datcore_adapter	∅ <ø> (∅)
director	∅ <ø> (∅)
director_v2	76.40% <ø> (-14.54%)	⬇️
dynamic_scheduler	∅ <ø> (∅)
dynamic_sidecar	59.79% <ø> (-30.01%)	⬇️
efs_guardian	∅ <ø> (∅)
invitations	∅ <ø> (∅)
osparc_gateway_server	79.42% <ø> (-5.73%)	⬇️
payments	∅ <ø> (∅)
resource_usage_tracker	∅ <ø> (∅)
storage	∅ <ø> (∅)
webclient	∅ <ø> (∅)
webserver	59.87% <ø> (-28.85%)	⬇️

---

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 ec1e84e...6b4d346. Read the comment docs.

[GitHK]

I guess there's gonna be a different PR with the fix on the pydantic-v2-migration branch, right?

[sanderegg]

thanks

[pcrespov]

I guess there's gonna be a different PR with the fix on the pydantic-v2-migration branch, right?

yes, this is a guideline so that I can fix it in the pydantic-v2-migration branch.

[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