Improvements to settings for testing the archive directory.

[hepcat72]

Summary Change Description

I made these changes after implementing the code that cleans up upon either explicit ArchiveFile delete or rollback in the MSRunsLoader, but this code can be used without those features to test ArchiveFile creation.

To be able to test actual file existence and the cleanup of the archive directory, I tweaked the settings to make it easier to use override_settings decorators to be able to test actual file creation/deletion. I added a TraceBasetestCase class for the cleanup code. It can be used for actually testing file creations/deletions

You cannot set a settings dict key value in a settings override, so creating separate settings variables to be able to change makes it more straightforward. This in controlled in the superclass mentioned above that comes with builtin cleanup.

Affected Issues/Pull Requests

• Resolves no issue

Review Notes

See comments in-line.

Checklist

This pull request will be merged once the following requirements are met. The author and/or reviewers should uncheck any unmet requirements:

• Review requirements
  • Minimum approvals: 1
  • No changes requested
  • All blocking issues resolved by reviewers
  • Specific reviewers: @add_username_here
  • Review period: 2 days
• Associated issue/pull request requirements:
  • [x] All requirements in affected issues marked "resolved" are satisfied
  • [x] All required pull requests are merged (or none)
• Basic requirements
  • [x] All linters pass
  • [x] All tests pass
  • [x] All conflicts resolved
• Overhead requirements
  • [x] New/changed method tests implemented/updated (or no change)
  • [ ] Updated Unreleased section of changelog.md (or no change)
  • [x] Migrations created & committed (or no change)

[hepcat72]

B: This should contain one commit to be be merged into main and not get_sequence_improvement since it is independent of the changes in that branch.

C: Looks like a nice way to allow us to test file creation. I'd probably opt to move such a test a functional test that loads the example data as part of a separate action in CI, but this is OK too.

Mind if I ask what the purpose of the blocking issue is? Since the merge into the PR for get_sequence_improvement is approved, it seems honestly pointless. I could just merge that PR and then this one would automatically merge into main. I haven't looked at the rest of the review issues yet, so if it's answered in there, you may ignore.