feat: in-process offline flagd resolver

[colebaileygit]

This PR

• Adds in-memory resolver for the flagd provider which watches a local JSON file to retrieve flag configurations
• Implements fractional, semver, stringcomp custom operators
• Integrates and passes gherkin test suite

Related Issues

open-feature/flagd#1264

Notes

Follow-up Tasks

• Add gRPC sync source option when using in-process provider
• Add schemas as submodule to verify flags against expected schema during parsing

How to test

cd providers/openfeature-provider-flagd
hatch run test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 90.90909% with 32 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.87%. Comparing base (d8e10c7) to head (ebec505).
Report is 27 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...rib/provider/flagd/resolvers/process/custom_ops.py	86.95%	12 Missing ⚠️
...enfeature/contrib/provider/flagd/resolvers/grpc.py	84.05%	11 Missing ⚠️
...b/provider/flagd/resolvers/process/file_watcher.py	93.84%	4 Missing ⚠️
...ure/contrib/provider/flagd/resolvers/in_process.py	94.33%	3 Missing ⚠️
...src/openfeature/contrib/provider/flagd/provider.py	88.23%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #74      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.55%   91.87%   +1.31%     
==========================================
  Files           8       12       +4     
  Lines         180      443     +263     
==========================================
+ Hits          163      407     +244     
- Misses         17       36      +19     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[beeme1mr]

Amazing, thank you! I'll review this as soon as possible.

[federicobond]

This is great work @colebaileygit, thank you! Will review as soon as possible too.

[beeme1mr]

This looks great! I left a few comments but the logic matches other implementations.

I really appreciate you working on this. It's exciting to see the Python SDK and providers maturing.

[beeme1mr]

Hey @colebaileygit, would you be interested in joining the org? It makes it easier to coordinate on issues and is an initial step towards becoming a maintainer if that's a goal. I would be happy to sponsor you, but there's certainly no obligation.

[colebaileygit]

Had a small battle with CI, but the test suite should be robust now finally 🎉
As a bonus I made it so the pre-commit hook evaluates using python 3.8 instead of your version so that we can catch those errors offline too

[beeme1mr]

I'll give @federicobond a chance to review since he has much more Python experience but it looks good to me.

[colebaileygit]

Shall I add this small change into this PR, or keep the two separate since the fractional update is a WIP breaking change? https://github.com/colebaileygit/open-feature-python-sdk-contrib/pull/1/files

Now that test-harness is merged this seems cleaner to include

[beeme1mr]

Feel free to include it while we chip away at merging in all the other PRs. I still need to work on the JS implementation.

[colebaileygit]

@federicobond @beeme1mr Anything else pending? We are starting to use this internally so being able to have an official versioned release would be amazing.

The CI error looks unrelated to the PR and some issue with codecov, so don't know what I can do to solve it unfortunately

[beeme1mr]

I'll review it today and schedule a release if everything looks good.