New Data Model : Add an Organization table

[RonanMorgan]

This table will be used to keep information about the owner of one or many cameras.

It will also be useful for resources access management (if you have access to the Site, you have access to all the resources linked to this site)

[RonanMorgan]

TODO :
=> add site_id in user table ✔️
=> add other CRUD functionalities for the Site endpoint and add tests for them ✔️
=> refactor Site -> Organization ✔️
=> adapt access behavior : a user can only access resources from the same site ✔️

• cameras ✔️
• detections ✔️
• users -> no refactor needed since only the ADMIN scope can use this endpoint

=> fix e2e tests & client tests ✔️
=> improve tests coverage

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 81.35593% with 22 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.71%. Comparing base (2dcab5b) to head (10f9f7e).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/app/db.py	7.69%	12 Missing ⚠️
src/app/api/api_v1/endpoints/cameras.py	76.92%	3 Missing ⚠️
src/app/api/api_v1/endpoints/detections.py	88.88%	3 Missing ⚠️
src/app/crud/base.py	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
client/pyroclient/client.py	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/app/api/api_v1/endpoints/login.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #332      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.49%   87.71%   -0.78%     
==========================================
  Files          28       31       +3     
  Lines         643      741      +98     
==========================================
+ Hits          569      650      +81     
- Misses         74       91      +17     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	87.33% <81.73%> (-0.67%)	⬇️
client	93.47% <66.66%> (-1.88%)	⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[frgfm]

Thanks for the PR!
Just a few high-level questions:

• whether admin should below to an org
• what you should be able to access when you're not in the org of the specific resource

The simple version in my mind is that org = ID + name, and we add organization_id to users & cameras table. Either we can create a pyronear org or consider that a resource without an org ID is an admin. What do you think?

[RonanMorgan]

@frgfm about the pyronear org : it seems dangerous to me to say that an empty org has the admin right, it would be easy to imagine a bug conducting to the creation of an empty org that's why I don't really like this solution (but I might be wrong)

furthermore we could imagine some development resources only available to pyronear member, in this case we could also have non admin user attached to the pyronear org.

[frgfm]

Thanks for the edits! Lengthy review I'm sorry, but I did spot a few issues here and there + added some discussion questions

Let me know what you think 👍

[frgfm]

Thanks a lot! Feels almost finalized, just a few details 🙂

[frgfm]

Thanks for the edits! High-level comments:

• there are still problems with the value put in the JWT payload. This is important, we need to pay attention to this so we can trust it later
• the new CRUD method could be very simple extensions of fetch_all
• watch out for search & replace all, you wanted to change 1-2 files, but you edited everything (and those should be reverted)

Almost there 🤞

[frgfm]

Looks like there is only a blank line + a rebase/merge to resolve conflicts and we're good to go :)

[frgfm]

There are still conflicts, but it's strange the last commit on main was 18hours ago, while your last push is from 12 hours ago. Are you merging the last version of main?

[frgfm]

Thanks a lot!

[frgfm]

cf. #304