Feature: refactor mapping count module to simplify the code

[syphax-bouazzouni]

Context

Follow up of #167, to fix ontoportal-lirmm/ontologies_api#106, agroportal/project-management#560

To be sure to clean and remove the mapping that no longer exists, handle the two following cases:

• An ontology no longer exists
• An ontology has a new version that no longer has mapping with the existent ontologies

To be sure that we still have the same count as before, I did this sheet comparing the old and new ways of doing the counts https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QWDQCIkEYPo8oSs2YA34t7OHx4xQDaHAWOQacpSpXj0/edit?usp=sharing

Changes

• Refactor mapping count to simplify the code (650598b)
• Clean the mapping_counts method (32ef2b5)
• Don't use delete_zombie_mapping_count in total mapping count (ad0e10e)
• Extract some smaller functions in mappings counts (35dba6b)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.45%. Comparing base (de2e01b) to head (35dba6b).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...es_linked_data/concerns/mappings/mapping_counts.rb	98.66%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##           development     #172      +/-   ##
===============================================
+ Coverage        82.33%   82.45%   +0.12%     
===============================================
  Files              103      103              
  Lines             6782     6743      -39     
===============================================
- Hits              5584     5560      -24     
+ Misses            1198     1183      -15     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	82.45% <98.66%> (+0.12%)	⬆️

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.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[imadbourouche]

When i test this in stageportal, in the mappings page, i have mappings not found despite that it shows me that there are mappings, between AGROVOC and CABTS, or is it the good response ?

[syphax-bouazzouni]

When i test this in stageportal, in the mappings page, i have mappings not found despite that it shows me that there are mappings, between AGROVOC and CABTS, or is it the good response ?

No not a good response

[syphax-bouazzouni]

When i test this in stageportal, in the mappings page, i have mappings not found despite that it shows me that there are mappings, between AGROVOC and CABTS, or is it the good response ?

No not a good response

@imadbourouche how can I reproduce this?

[imadbourouche]

When i test this in stageportal, in the mappings page, i have mappings not found despite that it shows me that there are mappings, between AGROVOC and CABTS, or is it the good response ?

No not a good response

@imadbourouche how can I reproduce this?

It's gone now, i did the test again in the mappings page and all good

[imadbourouche]

The code is clean, and all tests are passed. Everything seems good to me ✅

[imadbourouche]

@syphax-bouazzouni I still find No mappings found in stageportal

How to reproduce:

• go to mappings page for INRAETHES: https://stageportal.lirmm.fr/ontologies/INRAETHES?p=mappings
• mappings not found with CLC, PLT ontologies.