feat: Error if purge request made with dev mode disabled

[ChrisBQu]

Relevant issue(s)

Resolves #3140

Description

The issue was that if a purge request was made when the database was not in development mode, it would fail, and an error would be output on the node side of things. However, on the client side nothing indicated that the process had failed. Whether the purge was successful, or it failed, there would be no output.

I have created a new variable in the http package called IsDevMode, which is checked in the http/handler_extras.go/Purge function. If dev mode is enabled then htttp.StatusOK is written to the response header. If it is not enabled, then http.StatusBadRequest is written to the header instead, with a message indicating what happened.

Tasks

• I made sure the code is well commented, particularly hard-to-understand areas.
• I made sure the repository-held documentation is changed accordingly.
• I made sure the pull request title adheres to the conventional commit style (the subset used in the project can be found in tools/configs/chglog/config.yml).
• I made sure to discuss its limitations such as threats to validity, vulnerability to mistake and misuse, robustness to invalidation of assumptions, resource requirements, ...

How has this been tested?

The platform(s) on which this was tested:

• Windows

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 87.50000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.09%. Comparing base (be3f381) to head (c8d5793).
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cli/start.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #3295   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    78.09%   78.09%           
========================================
  Files          382      382           
  Lines        35405    35412    +7     
========================================
+ Hits         27647    27654    +7     
+ Misses        6123     6122    -1     
- Partials      1635     1636    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
all-tests	78.09% <87.50%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
http/errors.go	28.00% <ø> (ø)
http/handler.go	76.56% <ø> (ø)
http/handler_extras.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cli/start.go	25.73% <0.00%> (-0.11%)	⬇️

... and 19 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update be3f381...c8d5793. Read the comment docs.

[AndrewSisley]

praise: The code looks good and is easy to follow :) Good job on implementing the chosen design.

todo: I do think the design is faulty here, this will improve things for the http and cli clients, but not the embedded clients. And it worsens an existing discrepancy between the embedded Go client and the http/cli clients.

I expect push back from some other team members on my todo, so maybe chat with them before making changes.

IMO this is adding more tech debt on top of existing tech debt, and it would be much more sensible/cost-effective to fix the existing purge problem first instead of continuing to build upon it.

[nasdf]

todo: I do think the design is faulty here, this will improve things for the http and cli clients, but not the embedded clients. And it worsens an existing discrepancy between the embedded Go client and the http/cli clients.

The purge command doesn't need to exist in the embedded Go client. Its a development utility.

IMO this is adding more tech debt on top of existing tech debt, and it would be much more sensible/cost-effective to fix the existing purge problem first instead of continuing to build upon it.

I'm not sure what you mean by existing problem. Can you add more context?

[fredcarle]

LGMT. I don't see the tech debt issue raised by Andy as the purge command is a development utility that I don't see a need for on the embedded Go client. Let just wait to resolve the "purge problem" conversation before merging.

Majority view is that Purge is not needed in the embedded Go client. I still think it would be architecturally nicer, cheaper maintenance-wise, basically free to have there, but I'm not going to try fight everyone on that, especially not in the middle of this PR :)