[develop] Adding ability to disable requisites

[garethgreenaway]

What does this PR do?

Adding the ability to disable requisites during State runs.

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

N/A

Tests written?

Yes.

Commits signed with GPG?

Yes

Please review Salt's Contributing Guide for best practices.

See GitHub's page on GPG signing for more information about signing commits with GPG.

[garethgreenaway]

Manual tests for disabling requisites:

Require State file:

vim-tiny:
  pkg.installed:
    - require:
      - file: /tmp/vimrc

/tmp/vimrc:
  file.managed:
    - source: salt://test/edit/vimrc

Require disabled:

disabled_requisites: require

Normal run:

local:
----------
          ID: /tmp/vimrc
    Function: file.managed
      Result: True
     Comment: File /tmp/vimrc is in the correct state
     Started: 15:23:22.162520
    Duration: 20.0000000186 ms
     Changes:   
----------
          ID: vim-tiny
    Function: pkg.installed
      Result: True
     Comment: All specified packages are already installed
     Started: 15:23:22.185465
    Duration: 89.999999851 ms
     Changes:   

Summary for local
------------
Succeeded: 2
Failed:    0
------------
Total states run:     2
Total run time: 110.000 ms

Disabled run:

local:
----------
          ID: vim-tiny
    Function: pkg.installed
      Result: True
     Comment: All specified packages are already installed
     Started: 15:24:22.655635
    Duration: 89.999999851 ms
     Changes:   
----------
          ID: /tmp/vimrc
    Function: file.managed
      Result: True
     Comment: The file /tmp/vimrc is in the correct state
     Started: 15:24:22.747198
    Duration: 20.0000000186 ms
     Changes:   

Summary for local
------------
Succeeded: 2
Failed:    0
------------
Total states run:     2
Total run time: 110.000 ms

Require_In State File:

vim-tiny:
  pkg.installed

/tmp/vimrc:
  file.managed:
    - source: salt://test/edit/vimrc
    - require_in:
      - pkg: vim-tiny

Require disabled:

disabled_requisites: require_in

Normal Run:

local:
----------
          ID: /tmp/vimrc
    Function: file.managed
      Result: True
     Comment: The file /tmp/vimrc is in the correct state
     Started: 16:12:41.378112
    Duration: 10.0000000093 ms
     Changes:   
----------
          ID: vim-tiny
    Function: pkg.installed
      Result: True
     Comment: All specified packages are already installed
     Started: 16:12:41.393692
    Duration: 90.0000000838 ms
     Changes:   

Summary for local
------------
Succeeded: 2
Failed:    0
------------
Total states run:     2
Total run time: 100.000 ms

Disabled_run:

[WARNING ] The require_in requisite has been disabled, Ignoring.
local:
----------
          ID: vim-tiny
    Function: pkg.installed
      Result: True
     Comment: All specified packages are already installed
     Started: 16:13:17.053604
    Duration: 90.0000000838 ms
     Changes:   
----------
          ID: /tmp/vimrc
    Function: file.managed
      Result: True
     Comment: The file /tmp/vimrc is in the correct state
     Started: 16:13:17.149302
    Duration: 10.0000000093 ms
     Changes:   

Summary for local
------------
Succeeded: 2
Failed:    0
------------
Total states run:     2
Total run time: 100.000 ms

[isbm]

@garethgreenaway I would definitely start with some more unit tests in tests/unit/test_state.py for specific functions in the state compiler. The def requisite_in(self, high): deserves nearly a whole class of unit tests on its own due to its enormous size and complexity. And probably refactoring...

[terminalmage]

Perhaps the best way to test this is to unit test some of the intermediate functions in the state compiler. tests/unit/test_state.py does this, see test_render_error_on_invalid_requisite for an example.

This approach would require you to provide the high data, and then then call the salt.state.State object's requisite_in method.

I wonder also if it would be a good idea to add a message to the error list when a disabled requisite is used, which would cause the states not to run and return an error message.

[gtmanfred]

https://jenkinsci.saltstack.com/job/pr-lint/job/PR-49955/5/warnings52Result/new/ lint warning on the test

[cachedout]

@terminalmage and @isbm Re-review requested.

[cachedout]

LGTM. I think this fits the bill.

[isbm]

I would still write a bit more UTs though.

[rallytime]

@garethgreenaway There is a merge conflict here now unfortunately. Can you rebase and resolve the conflicts?