GQL-118: Add support for retrieving a collection revision

[htranho]

Overview

What is the feature?

This feature adds support for fetching specific revisions of collections in the GraphQL API. It allows querying a particular historical revision of a collection by its concept ID and revision ID.

What is the Solution?

Route all queries for revisions exclusively through the UMM endpoint, which does support historical revisions.

Key changes include:

1. src/cmr/concepts/concept.js:
   Added support for revisionId in the fetchUmm method.
   Modified the parseUmm method to filter out items that don't match the requested revisionId.
   Added logic to update the item count when filtering by revisionId.

2. src/resolvers/tests/collection.test.js:
   Added new tests for retrieving collections by revisionId.
   Included tests for both successful retrieval and cases where the specified revision doesn't exist.

3. src/types/collection.graphql:
   Added revisionId as a new input parameter in the CollectionInput type.

4. src/utils/tests/parseRequestedFields.test.js:
   Added a new test case for when revisionId is provided, ensuring all keys are moved to ummKeys.

5. src/utils/cmrQuery.js:
   Modified to support the all_revisions parameter when options.allRevisions is set.

6. src/utils/parseRequestedFields.js:
   Updated to handle the revisionId parameter.
   Modified logic to use UMM endpoint exclusively when revisionId is present.

7. src/utils/umm/collectionKeyMap.json:
   Added 'provider' to the list of shared keys.
   Mapped 'provider' to 'meta.provider-id' in the UMM key mappings.

What areas of the application does this impact?

Query for single collection: revisionId added as new parameter to CollectionInput

Testing

Reproduction steps

• Environment for testing: Local development environment
• Collection to test with: Any collection with multiple revisions in CMR

1. Start the GraphQL server locally.
2. Use a GraphQL client (e.g., GraphQL Playground) to send queries.
3. Test querying a specific revision of a collection, example:

   query Collection($params: CollectionInput) {
        collection(params: $params) {
            conceptId
            shortName
            revisionId
            revisionDate
            associationDetails
        }
    }
    with
    {
        "params": {
            "conceptId": "C1200237617-MMT_1",
            "revisionId": "23"
        }
    }

• Use MMT to revome or add Variable or any other concept type's associations to this collection. check if changes seen in graphql.
• Request all collection fields. Known error in main branch and also this branch is the field generateVariableDrafts.

4. Verify that the correct revision is returned with the requested fields.
5. Test error cases by requesting fields that are not allowed for specific revisions:

   query {
     collection(params: { conceptId: "C1200237617-MMT_1", revisionId: "23" }) {
       conceptId
       revisionId
       revisions {
         count
       }
     }
   }

6. Verify that appropriate error messages are returned.
7. Test fetching a collection without specifying a revision ID to ensure backward compatibility.

Checklist

• I have added automated tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (aa8f5f7) to head (611ad91).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #182   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files          115       115           
  Lines         2706      2719   +13     
  Branches       330       335    +5     
=========================================
+ Hits          2706      2719   +13     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[macrouch]

I'm confused about how we are handling json fields. In my testing I tried added boxes to my request and I just got null, but when I add the revisions field I get a CMR error. We had talked during one iteration of this ticket that we could let users know fields weren't supported. Did we want to do that or are we just returning null?

It also seems like the revisions field is broken. Even without including the revisionId parameter I still get back a CMR error when requesting the revisions field ("The mime type [application/json] is not supported when all_revisions = true.") which could be confusing for a user

[eudoroolivares2016]

Did some integration testing on this against my local MMT hooked to SIT while this was up. Obviously that is its own effort but, in principle we can use this API to fix that issue in MMT