[uss_qualifier] Add resource environments

[BenjaminPelletier]

This PR is a follow-up to #1749 to fix the challenge of clearing all the areas (in PrepareFlightPlanners) that will later be used in ConflictHigherPriority after offsetting each instance to avoid conflicts. The approach taken in this PR is:

• Create a PluralResource interface indicating that a resource actually contains many resources
• Annotate FlightPlannersResource as a PluralResource
• Create a ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator interface indicating that the implementing object (usually a resource) is capable of producing a sequence of resource environments (set of resources each identified by an ID)
• Create a ResourceCombinationsResource which is a resource that is a ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator for each applicable combination of a set of plural resources
• Create a EnvironmentAugmentationResource which is a ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator resource that attaches additional resources to each environment produced by an underlying/source ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator according to specified ResourceProvidingResources
• Update PrepareFlightPlanners to accept a ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator that produces environments with flight_intents in the generated environments
• Create a ResourceEnvironmentsActionGenerator that generates an action per environment from a ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator
• Chain the tools above together to allow the priority_preemption_flights_provider resource in the F3548-21 test suite to inform both PrepareFlightPlanners and ConflictHigherPriority:

flowchart TD
  conflicting_flights[conflicting_flights<br>FlightIntentsResource]
  priority_preemption_flights_provider[priority_preemption_flights_provider<br>TriangularCascadeSoutheastResource<br>ResourceProvidingResource]
  priority_preemption_combinations[priority_preemption_combinations<br>ResourceCombinationsResource<br>ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator]
  flight_planners[flight_planners<br>FlightPlannersResource<br>PluralResource]
  priority_preemption_environments[priority_preemption_environments<br>EnvironmentAugmentationResource<br>ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator]
  flight_intents_environments[flight_intents_environments<br>ConcatenatedResourceEnvironmentsResource<br>ResourceEnvironmentsGenerator]
  other_envs["Other (future) flight-intent-providing environments"]
  style other_envs stroke-dasharray: 5 5
  PrepareFlightPlanners
  ActionGenerator[ResourceEnvironmentsActionGenerator]
  ConflictHigherPriority@{ shape: procs, label: "ConflictHigherPriority"}

  conflicting_flights -->|flight_intents| priority_preemption_flights_provider
  flight_planners -->|uss1| priority_preemption_combinations
  flight_planners -->|uss2| priority_preemption_combinations
  priority_preemption_combinations -->|uss1,uss1<br>uss1,uss2<br>...| priority_preemption_environments
  priority_preemption_flights_provider -->|flight_intents, ...| priority_preemption_environments
  priority_preemption_environments -->|flight_intents,uss1,uss1<br>flight_intents,uss1,uss2<br>...| flight_intents_environments
  other_envs -->|flight_intents,...<br>...| flight_intents_environments
  flight_intents_environments -->|flight_intents| PrepareFlightPlanners
  priority_preemption_environments -->|flight_intents,uss1,uss1<br>flight_intents,uss1,uss2<br>...| ActionGenerator --> ConflictHigherPriority

Loading

This PR also adjusts resource instantiation to allow optional resources to be specified as keyword-based resource dependencies even though keyword-based resource dependencies can't specify a default value when the resource isn't provided (we assume it's None).

My intent after this PR is to extend this approach to other similar situations: certainly ConflictEqualPriorityNotPermitted, but likely also deprecating all special-purpose action generators.

[mickmis]

LGTM

[mickmis]

nit: not needed anymore :)

[BenjaminPelletier]

Indeed; I've removed after merging main :)

[mickmis]

IIUC this change is not breaking for users of this test suite, correct?
If not, this would warrant a note in the 'next release notes'.

[BenjaminPelletier]

Correct, no change for test suite users.

[mickmis]

Does this change warrants a note in the 'next release notes'? Scenarios may be used directly in configurations.

[BenjaminPelletier]

Sounds good; I had assumed effectively no one would use the scenarios directly, but probably not good to make that assumption. Note added.