Add support for --no-use-container option

[jonife]

Why is this change necessary?

use-container currently doesn't have an opposite option called no-use-container, user wants to use the IDE toolkit which depends on samcli to set default behaviors but still wants the flexibility of using the opposite option to carry out different operation.

How does it address the issue?

Add support for no-use-container allow the cli to pass use-container = false in the samConfig file

What side effects does this change have?

no-use-container can result to use_container = false in samConfig
sam sync

Container Options:                        
                                    
    -u, --use-container / --no-use-container
                                    Build functions within an AWS Lambda-like container.
                                                                      

Mandatory Checklist

PRs will only be reviewed after checklist is complete

• Add input/output type hints to new functions/methods
• Write design document if needed (Do I need to write a design document?)
• Write/update unit tests
• Write/update integration tests
• Write/update functional tests if needed
• make pr passes
• make update-reproducible-reqs if dependencies were changed
• Write documentation

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[valerena]

What you probably want to check here is that the parameter in the command line gets picked up (--no-use-container, that you're adding). To test that, you need to pass it in this part. Like this line.

Otherwise, you're just testing that the samconfig works fine, not the command line argument. (Probably the same for sync below)

[jonife]

Both tests are different. The use cases in the link you provided focus on testing overrides. For example, if my configuration includes "use_container": True, I can pass --no-use-container to override it, effectively setting "use_container": False.

This is a draft PR to validate whether make schema works. Please note that the PR is not complete as you review it. I have unit test coverage for overrides.

[hnnasit]

I suppose we could have 1 unit test for testing the default config value as here and another one like @valerena mentioned about with use-container=True and override it with --no-use-container to assert it gets set to False. The sam sync test below could be updated with the latter case since both cases stem from the same click option anyways (we might not need duplicate tests for each command).

[roger-zhangg]

If customer doesn't specify --use-container or --no-use-container, will sam cli still use the value from samconfig.toml after this change? E.g. If samconfig.toml has use_container=true, and customer run sam build without any flag, it should continue to use container to build right?

[jonife]

This documentation might help answer your question: SAM CLI Configuration File Precedence.

[roger-zhangg]

if customer has use_container=true in sam config.toml, Will sam build --no-use-container --save-params update use_container=true in samconfig.toml to use_container=false ?

[jonife]

if customer has use_container=true in sam config.toml, Will sam build --no-use-container --save-params update use_container=true in samconfig.toml to use_container=false ?

yes

[roger-zhangg]

Non-blocking, is_flag could be removed after this change.

[jonife]

closing this pr in favor of #7769 due to inability to rebase locally.