Fix resource objects lifecycle state handling

The lifecycle state is "negatively" propagated from a resource
to its object classes and from an object class to its object types:
if an item at some level is in non-production state, all its children
are considered to be in non-production state, regardless of their
lifecycle state value.

repo/task-api/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/task/api/TaskExecutionMode.java → infra/schema/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/schema/TaskExecutionMode.java

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
  * and European Union Public License. See LICENSE file for details.
  */
 
-package com.evolveum.midpoint.task.api;
+package com.evolveum.midpoint.schema;
 
 /**
  * Describes the execution mode this task runs in. For example, if it is a "full execution" or a preview/simulation.

infra/schema/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/schema/util/LifecycleUtil.java

@@ -74,7 +74,16 @@ public static <R extends AbstractRoleType> VirtualAssignmenetSpecification<R> ge
         return virtualAssignmenetSpecification;
     }
 
-    @Experimental // The behavior should be configurable
+    /**
+     * Returns true if the specified configuration item (e.g. resource, object class, object type, item, mapping, ...)
+     * is in "production" lifecycle state.
+     *
+     * The idea is that configuration items in `active` and `deprecated` states will have a different behavior
+     * than the ones in `proposed` state. (The behavior of other states is going to be determined later.)
+     *
+     * TODO Preliminary code.
+     */
+    @Experimental
     public static boolean isInProduction(String lifecycleState) {
         return lifecycleState == null
                 || SchemaConstants.LIFECYCLE_ACTIVE.equals(lifecycleState)

infra/schema/src/main/resources/xml/ns/public/common/common-provisioning-3.xsd

@@ -621,6 +621,20 @@
             <xsd:element ref="tns:documentation" minOccurs="0"/>
             <xsd:element ref="tns:lifecycleState" minOccurs="0">
                 <xsd:annotation>
+                    <xsd:documentation>
+                        Lifecycle state of the object class or object type. First, it drives the visibility of the configuration
+                        for production-like or simulation tasks. Second, it influences the behavior of specific provisioning
+                        operations (like shadow classification).
+
+                        The lifecycle state is propagated downwards, from the level of a resource, down to the level
+                        of an object class, and finally to the level of an object type. If the state is evaluated
+                        as "non-matching" at a given level, all lower levels are ignored. For example, if an object class
+                        has a "proposed" lifecycle state, all its object types are considered to be in non-production
+                        development state, regardless of their own lifecycle state values.
+
+                        See https://docs.lab.evolveum.com/midpoint/devel/design/simulations/simulated-shadows/ for more
+                        information.
+                    </xsd:documentation>
                     <xsd:appinfo>
                         <a:displayName>ObjectType.lifecycleState</a:displayName>
                         <a:since>4.7</a:since>

provisioning/provisioning-impl/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/provisioning/impl/ProvisioningContext.java

@@ -476,26 +476,33 @@ public boolean isInMaintenance() {
         return ResourceTypeUtil.isInMaintenance(resource);
     }
 
-    // Preliminary code
-    @SuppressWarnings("BooleanMethodIsAlwaysInverted")
-    private boolean isResourceInProduction() {
-        return LifecycleUtil.isInProduction(
-                resource.getLifecycleState());
-    }
-
-    // Preliminary code
-    // FIXME implement checking for refined object class LC state - currently it is overridden by respective object type
-    //  state, which is not always what is needed (most probably we want the 'proposed' state at OC level to override
-    //  anything that could be set at the type level ... we should decide on this)
+    /**
+     * Returns true if the definition of the current resource object is in "production" lifecycle state
+     * (`active` or `deprecated`). This determines the behavior of some processing components, as described in
+     * https://docs.lab.evolveum.com/midpoint/devel/design/simulations/simulated-shadows/.
+     */
     public boolean isObjectDefinitionInProduction() {
-        if (!isResourceInProduction()) {
-            return false; // We ignore any object class/type level settings here.
+        // Level 1: resource
+        if (!LifecycleUtil.isInProduction(resource.getLifecycleState())) {
+            // The whole resource is in development mode. We ignore any object class/type level settings in this case.
+            return false;
+        }
+        if (resourceObjectDefinition == null) {
+            // Resource is in production, and we have no further information.
+            throw new IllegalStateException(
+                    "Asked for production state of the object definition, but there is no object definition: " + this);
+        }
+        // Level 2: object class
+        ResourceObjectClassDefinition classDefinition = resourceObjectDefinition.getObjectClassDefinition();
+        if (!LifecycleUtil.isInProduction(classDefinition.getLifecycleState())) {
+            return false;
+        }
+        // Level 3: object type (if there's any)
+        ResourceObjectTypeDefinition typeDefinition = resourceObjectDefinition.getTypeDefinition();
+        if (typeDefinition == null) {
+            return true;
         }
-        // Note that the object type/class lifecycle state may be null. This means that it should inherit the value
-        // of the resource LC state. In that case it means that it should be considered as "production", because the resource
-        // itself is in production state (per above condition). Hence the following code is OK.
-        return resourceObjectDefinition == null
-                || LifecycleUtil.isInProduction(resourceObjectDefinition.getLifecycleState());
+        return LifecycleUtil.isInProduction(typeDefinition.getLifecycleState());
     }
 
     public void checkNotInMaintenance() throws MaintenanceException {

provisioning/provisioning-impl/src/test/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/provisioning/impl/misc/TestResourceLifecycle.java

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 
 import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;
 
-import static com.evolveum.midpoint.task.api.TaskExecutionMode.*;
+import static com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.TaskExecutionMode.*;
 import static com.evolveum.midpoint.test.util.MidPointTestConstants.TEST_RESOURCES_DIR;
 
 import java.io.File;
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.processor.ResourceAttribute;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.result.OperationResult;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.task.api.Task;
-import com.evolveum.midpoint.task.api.TaskExecutionMode;
+import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.TaskExecutionMode;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.test.DummyTestResource;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.util.exception.CommonException;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.util.exception.ConfigurationException;
@@ -210,7 +210,9 @@ public void test120ClassificationOnResourceWithProposedClasses() throws Exceptio
                 I_SECURITY_GROUP); // no reclassification (production-like mode)
 
         // The non-production object type with "simulated development" task
-        // Note that the lifecycle state is of the type "entitlement/mail-group" is "proposed" because of the type inheritance.
+        // Note that the lifecycle state is of the type "entitlement/mail-group" is "proposed" in spite of the type inheritance,
+        // because the class "proposed" state makes the whole class proposed, without considering the declared states of
+        // individual object types.
         checkClassification(
                 RESOURCE_DUMMY_PROPOSED_CLASSES,
                 SIMULATED_DEVELOPMENT,

provisioning/provisioning-impl/src/test/resources/misc/lifecycle/resource-dummy-proposed-classes.xml

@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@
         <objectType>
             <kind>entitlement</kind>
             <intent>mail-group</intent>
+            <lifecycleState>active</lifecycleState> <!-- will be ignored, as the whole class is "proposed" -->
             <delineation>
                 <objectClass>ri:GroupObjectClass</objectClass>
                 <filter>
@@ -92,6 +93,7 @@
         <objectType>
             <kind>entitlement</kind>
             <intent>security-group</intent>
+            <lifecycleState>active</lifecycleState> <!-- will be ignored, as the whole class is "proposed" -->
             <delineation>
                 <objectClass>ri:GroupObjectClass</objectClass>
                 <filter>

repo/task-api/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/task/api/Task.java

@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.delta.ItemDelta;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.path.ItemName;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.path.ItemPath;
+import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.TaskExecutionMode;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.result.OperationResult;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.statistics.StatisticsCollector;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.util.task.ActivityPath;

repo/task-api/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/task/api/test/NullTaskImpl.java

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.delta.ItemDelta;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.path.ItemName;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.prism.path.ItemPath;
+import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.TaskExecutionMode;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.result.OperationResult;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.statistics.*;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.task.api.*;

repo/task-quartz-impl/src/main/java/com/evolveum/midpoint/task/quartzimpl/TaskQuartzImpl.java

@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 import javax.xml.datatype.XMLGregorianCalendar;
 import javax.xml.namespace.QName;
 
+import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.TaskExecutionMode;
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.constants.ObjectTypes;
 
 import com.evolveum.midpoint.schema.reporting.ConnIdOperation;