Rename osim

[costaconrado]

This PR renames OSIM module to Workflows.

In order to achieve that this PR is separated in 4 commits that respectively has the purpose of:

• Change the folder name modifying imports, settings and comments/documentations;
• Change classes, exceptions and models names and attributes to comply with new naming;
• Change constants names related to the module;
• Change the API path from /osim/* to /workflows/*.

Closes OSIDB-1395

[osoukup]

LGTM

This is obviously a breaking change so to be really precise we should release it as a new major version. We could argue that it was an experimental module up until now - no sure if it would be safe anyway @JakubFrejlach FYI.

Or maybe it is already a good time to do a major release? Maybe at point when we have all the task management done? Or maybe also trackers? (those are probably done API-wise) Waiting for the real GA would take more time.

WDYT @RedHatProductSecurity/osidb-devs ?

[costaconrado]

@osoukup my opinion on that is should at least wait until all task management is done so we don't break it twice for task management, about trackers I think that we could wait until its done so we only do one major release in a short period of time, if OSIM team need task management before that I believe we could just deploy it to stage for development... Should we wait for more opinions on that before merging this branch or can I merge it and move this discussion to slack?

[osoukup]

@osoukup my opinion on that is should at least wait until all task management is done so we don't break it twice for task management, about trackers I think that we could wait until its done so we only do one major release in a short period of time, if OSIM team need task management before that I believe we could just deploy it to stage for development... Should we wait for more opinions on that before merging this branch or can I merge it and move this discussion to slack?

@costaconrado this discussion does not have to block the merge. I agree that it would be better to deliver this all together and ideally together with tracker workflow support to have only one major release.

[Elkasitu]

WDYT @RedHatProductSecurity/osidb-devs ?

Can't we just mark the /osim/ path as deprecated and have both /osim/ and /workflows/ paths?

[jobselko]

Could you rename this file to something more readable? :)

[costaconrado]

I sure can, also noticed that I missed the last migration naming I will add a new PR for it.

[jobselko]

Thanks!
Regarding the last migration which is already in master - I am not sure whether it is safe to rename it. We discussed something similar in past with Ondrej and Adrian. @osoukup or @Elkasitu, WDYT?

[jobselko]

@costaconrado I think we can leave the 104 with old name and just fix 105 :).

[osoukup]

Changing the name of an existing migration can make some mess which is theoretically possible to clean manually but not trivial or save. I would leave the existing ones and just try to be more careful with the new ones.

On one hand the migrations are auto-generated and theoretically people should not need to read them but sometimes it may be handy or at least good to get some understanding etc.

I prefer human readable migrations so eg. I try to process them by black but as a team we once decided to generally exclude them from this so it is up to every individual.

[Elkasitu]

Reason for skipping the failing OpenAPI check:

Apparently oasdiff likes to do deprecation in a very specific way and seems to not be correctly documented or buggy, so we've decided to ignore its errors as the endpoints are correctly marked as deprecated from our POV, we have also confirmed that this shouldn't inherently make the check fail in subsequent PRs