Data requirements comparison script

[elsaperelli]

Summary

Since we are reworking our data requirements calculation in fqm-execution, we have found a need for comparing our data requirements output to that of the elm-parser-for-ecqms, which we know to be a more accurate data requirements calculation.

New behavior

No need behavior within fqm-execution, just the addition of scripts for comparison and the /data-requirements directory that contains everything (structured similarly to the /regression directory).

Code changes

• data-requirements/README.md - explains the purpose of the data-requirements directory and scripts and details instructions on how to run the scripts and how to interpret their outputs.
• data-requirements/compare.sh - this script compares the overall outputs of the data requirements (similar to the regression script)
• .gitignore - add some directories from /data-requirements
• .gitkeep - add jan-2024-connectathon to keep an empty directory
• data-requirements/fqm-e-dr.ts - helper file for calculating the data-requirements for all measures in jan-2024-connectathon using fqm-execution (used in both bash scripts)
• data-requirements/summary-compare.sh - summary comparison bash script
• data-requirements/summary-compare.ts - summary comparison helper file

Testing guidance

NOTE: I detail most of the necessary information in the /data-requirements/README.md so please let me know if there is anything missing in that file that would be helpful!

• First, read through the README.md for running instructions and output descriptions.
• Make sure to get the january-2024-connectathon files from me that we cannot check into this repository.
• Make sure both of the scripts run and that their outputs make sense.
• I am mainly looking for feedback on the readability and usability of these scripts. I spent potentially too much time on this task trying to figure out what outputs were the most helpful. In an effort to keep things moving, I want to get feedback on the current state. I am of the opinion that if there are any major suggestions (i.e. "We should output the comparison results to their own files!") that we should make a backlog task for them.

[github-actions[bot]]

Coverage report

St.:grey_question:	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🟢	Statements	85.47%	2377/2781
🟡	Branches	73.28%	2219/3028
🟢	Functions	88.15%	424/481
🟢	Lines	85.81%	2297/2677

Test suite run success

451 tests passing in 31 suites.

Report generated by 🧪jest coverage report action from 5ea2981f7b170c1c101e0421de2c4fbcc0916ca4