Update in_situ_data stored to include the source each measurement was taken

[amehta-scottlogic]

Acceptance Criteria

• Investigate possible sensor_types, entities and other fields from open AQ to see what might be interesting to store/useful for users to see
• Bring findings to team and decide what we will store
• Each document in the in_situ_data collection has a field 'api_source' (with value OpenAQ) + other fields that have been decided
• entity and data_sensor_type should be appear in each document.

Test Checklist:

• [x] Test Analysis & discussion with developer
• [x] Write Test Cases / Charters
• [x] Test Cases & Charters Reviewed
• [x] Test Cases Executed
• [ ] Charter Executed
• [x] Regression tests executed
• [ ] Write Automation tests for regression

[mwalker-scottlogic]

Only regression tested forecast db as in_situ is too unstable

[mnyamunda-scottlogic]

Test Analysis

• Verify that api_source can be seen within the database. Will we need to actually have a different source to properly test that this works? eg run from openAQ and then from a different source. Can be automated. (Only certain data types allowed as values)
• sensor_type Verify that this is correctly shown. Will we need other sensor types to know that the value is correct? Can be automated (only certain data types allowed as values)
• entity verify it is present and can only be certain values.

Explore sensor_type key with a JSON response editing tool, to discover how bad data is handled.

[mnyamunda-scottlogic]

TC execution revealed a third contender for sensor_types. "low-cost sensor" What is the difference between that and "low cost"?

[mnyamunda-scottlogic]

Test Cases executed. Charter requires integration tests. These will be written in another ticket. (in-situ pipeline tests)

Here ⬇ https://github.com/orgs/ECMWFCode4Earth/projects/12/views/6?pane=issue&itemId=65561990