chore(pydantic): V1->V2 migration

[ahiuchingau]

Superseded by #14871.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.25000% with 9 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.20%. Comparing base (65885b2) to head (00a4299).
Report is 55 commits behind head on edge.

❗ Current head 00a4299 differs from pull request most recent head e83d1b5. Consider uploading reports for the commit e83d1b5 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             edge   #14805      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.24%   67.20%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        2495     2495              
  Lines       71254    71396     +142     
  Branches     8937     8984      +47     
==========================================
+ Hits        47918    47979      +61     
- Misses      21235    21302      +67     
- Partials     2101     2115      +14     

Flag	Coverage Δ
hardware	55.57% <100.00%> (ø)
shared-data	75.95% <96.10%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

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

Files	Coverage Δ
...are/opentrons_hardware/drivers/can_bus/settings.py	95.77% <100.00%> (ø)
...pentrons_shared_data/gripper/gripper_definition.py	95.23% <100.00%> (-0.22%)	⬇️
...pentrons_shared_data/labware/labware_definition.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...a/python/opentrons_shared_data/pipette/__init__.py	94.73% <100.00%> (ø)
...python/opentrons_shared_data/protocol/dev_types.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
..._shared_data/protocol/models/protocol_schema_v6.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
..._shared_data/protocol/models/protocol_schema_v7.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
..._shared_data/protocol/models/protocol_schema_v8.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...trons_shared_data/protocol/models/shared_models.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...pentrons_shared_data/pipette/pipette_definition.py	94.23% <96.55%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
... and 1 more

... and 55 files with indirect coverage changes

[sfoster1]

we sure about these changes? slotName: Optional[str] without the =None means "you have to explicitly specify it but you can specify it as None/null" which I think is what we want

[SyntaxColoring]

In Pydantic v1, slotName: Optional[str] defaulted to None when the field was missing from the source JSON:

>>> class M(pydantic.BaseModel):
...     slotName: typing.Optional[str]
...
>>> M.parse_raw("{}")
M(slotName=None)

In Pydantic v2, that becomes a validation error. If you want a default, you have to specify a default. This is a good, but breaking, change, so I guess the upgrade script applies this fixup liberally.

In this particular case, with the Params class, I think it's correct for these to default to None. In other cases of f: Optional[T], though, we'll definitely need to be careful to cross-check against our underlying JSON schemas.

[SyntaxColoring]

This mostly makes sense to me so far, thanks!

[SyntaxColoring]

It looks like this is saying json_encoders isn't doing anything anymore; this is dead code.

According to the migration guide, there's some other way to do this now. But it isn't clear to me what this was accomplishing before. These lambdas look like straight passthroughs to me.

[SyntaxColoring]

This whole WellDefinition model is apparently unused. I think we can delete it.