🎨 introducing contract testing

[matusdrobuliak66]

What do these changes do?

• 🎨 introducing contract testing
• 🐛 Fix pinning of API server licensed resources 🎨 pin licensed_resources for public api #7284

The consumer (Sim4Life) has unit tests running in its own CI. These unit tests use the Pact framework, which automatically generates a pact (contract) that defines the expected interactions with the provider (Osparc API Server). This contract is published to a Pact Broker container that we are hosting ourselves and is publicly available.

This PR introduces unit tests on the provider side. When these tests run, they automatically inform the Pact Broker of the last execution time and status. The Pact Broker URL will be added to the Batman slide/credentials page. These tests will be executed on each PR request.

Next steps: I have received four more contracts from the Sim4Life consumer, and I will add them.

---

Pact framework: https://docs.pact.io/pact_broker

Related issue/s

• relates Add contract test between Sim4life and Osparc #7069
• relates Provider (API Server) unit tests #7114

How to test

Dev-ops checklist

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.20%. Comparing base (59bf9c3) to head (034063e).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7172      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.14%   87.20%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1690     1683       -7     
  Lines       65625    65447     -178     
  Branches     1121     1121              
==========================================
- Hits        57192    57072     -120     
+ Misses       8113     8056      -57     
+ Partials      320      319       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	65.41% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unittests	86.35% <100.00%> (+0.05%)	⬆️

Components	Coverage Δ
api	∅ <ø> (∅)
pkg_aws_library	94.24% <ø> (ø)
pkg_dask_task_models_library	97.09% <ø> (ø)
pkg_models_library	91.57% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
pkg_notifications_library	84.57% <ø> (ø)
pkg_postgres_database	88.28% <ø> (ø)
pkg_service_integration	70.03% <ø> (ø)
pkg_service_library	72.77% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
pkg_settings_library	90.61% <ø> (ø)
pkg_simcore_sdk	85.46% <ø> (ø)
agent	96.46% <ø> (ø)
api_server	90.68% <100.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
autoscaling	96.08% <ø> (ø)
catalog	91.73% <ø> (ø)
clusters_keeper	99.24% <ø> (ø)
dask_sidecar	91.25% <ø> (ø)
datcore_adapter	98.06% <ø> (ø)
director	76.59% <ø> (ø)
director_v2	91.30% <ø> (ø)
dynamic_scheduler	97.33% <ø> (ø)
dynamic_sidecar	89.74% <ø> (ø)
efs_guardian	90.25% <ø> (ø)
invitations	93.28% <ø> (ø)
osparc_gateway_server	∅ <ø> (∅)
payments	92.66% <ø> (ø)
resource_usage_tracker	89.11% <ø> (-0.11%)	⬇️
storage	84.47% <ø> (+0.28%)	⬆️
webclient	∅ <ø> (∅)
webserver	85.31% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️

---

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 59bf9c3...034063e. Read the comment docs.

[sanderegg]

This looks pretty cool tool!
Please adjust the CI names and also the dependencies.

[mrnicegyu11]

minors, thanks

[pcrespov]

Nice work. Left some comments and suggestions .

[bisgaard-itis]

Cool stuff. Someday you will have to explain me what exactly the advantage of the consumer driven contract testing is 😅, compared to using the openapi specs (which I guess is the provider driven 🤔).

[GitHK]

waiting for other issues to be addressed.
Pleas take care into updating the javascript dependencies

[sanderegg]

Please check the CI workflow name and file name. Thanks!

[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