Replace FastAPI with LiteStar & JSON responses with HTMX

[spwoodcock]

What type of PR is this? (check all applicable)

• 🍕 Feature
• 🐛 Bug Fix
• 📝 Documentation
• 🧑‍💻 Refactor
• ✅ Test
• 🤖 Build or CI
• ❓ Other (please specify)

Describe this PR

• Litestar isn't so different to FastAPI.
• It has a lot more built in and some really nice patterns.
• It's a bit stricted on return types on endpoints etc.
• But one very nice thing is the DTO pattern where we no longer need so many copies of the same pydantic models. Instead we extend from the primary DbXXX model and use excludes= or includes= to determine which fields to included. These DTOs are only using for model serialisation on input and output from end points. All db queries use the primary db model.

For now I only did the migration, keeping all the same JSON endpoints for the existing frontend.

In future, we can start to add HTMX endpoints for HTMX responses instead of JSON, making the whole app a bit simpler into the future 🤞

Review Guide

Notes for the reviewer. How to test this change?

Checklist before requesting a review

• 📖 Read the Field-TM Contributing Guide: https://github.com/hotosm/field-tm/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md
• 📖 Read the HOT Code of Conduct: https://docs.hotosm.org/code-of-conduct
• 👷‍♀️ Create small PRs. In most cases, this will be possible.
• ✅ Provide tests for your changes.
• 📝 Use descriptive commit messages.
• 📗 Update any related documentation and include any relevant screenshots.

[optional] What gif best describes this PR or how it makes you feel?

[spwoodcock]

#1685

[spwoodcock]

Can we keep engine=calamine in the xlsx file reading? Its much more performant, as a driver written in rust

[Anuj-Gupta4]

Sure. I will add back.

[spwoodcock]

I fixed the db pool usage during tests, so now we can run:

just test backend

Then fix the endpoint responses based on the output, e.g.

ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_delete_project - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_upload_data_extracts - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_generate_project_files - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_update_project - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_summaries - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_by_id - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_read_project - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_update_and_download_project_form - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_get_contributors - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_add_new_project_admin - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_create_entity - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_download_project_boundary - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
ERROR tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_download_task_boundaries - TypeError: AbstractDTO.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'sub'
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_create_project_invalid - assert 400 == 422
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_create_project_with_dup - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type0] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type1] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type2] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type3] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type4] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_valid_geojson_types[geojson_type5] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_invalid_geojson_types[geojson_type0] - assert 400 == 422
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_invalid_geojson_types[geojson_type1] - assert 400 == 422
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_hashtags[tag1, tag2, tag3-expected_output0] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_hashtags[tag1   tag2    tag3-expected_output1] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_hashtags[tag1, tag2 tag3    tag4-expected_output2] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_hashtags[TAG1, tag2 #TAG3-expected_output3] - assert 400 == 200
FAILED tests/test_projects_routes.py::test_project_task_split - assert 201 == 200
15 failed, 38 passed, 13 errors in 160.86s (0:02:40)

[spwoodcock]

@Anuj-Gupta4 I'm going to rebase on the latest dev, so if you have any unpushed commits, please stash them, reset this branch, then re-apply 🙏 Sorry for the hassle

[spwoodcock]

A good way there! To be continued in a future PR 😄