[WIP] Project update sync assets (round 2)

[john-westcott-iv]

SUMMARY

This PR replaces PR #7099

This is an initial cut as having parts of Tower being controlled by code. A project update of an SCM based project will not attempt to create job templates and workflow job templates from files within the source. The current proposed files are:
assets/job_templates.yml
assets/workflow_job_template_nodes.yml
assets/workflow_job_templates.yml

This PR (currently):

• Adds a "Sync Assets" checkbox to the project UI screen. If enabled, during a manually invoked project sync the project_update.yml playbook will now include a role which will read these files and then leverage the awx.awx collection to build assets within tower.
• Adds an export endpoint to project API (still needs work).
• Adds a PROJECT_SYNC_ACCESS_TOKEN_EXPIRE_SECONDS setting
• Modifies UI for project export job types

Related
#526
#578

ISSUE TYPE

• Feature Pull Request

COMPONENT NAME

• API
• UI

AWX VERSION

16.0.0

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

[shanemcd]

Like we talked about earlier, I would be interested in seeing if we can associate a Tower credential to the project and use that instead of obtaining an oauth token behind the scenes.

[john-westcott-iv]

@ryanpetrello @wenottingham Should we allow for relaunch on a project export. Keeping in mind that an export takes a commit message and a list of job template IDs. On a failure I suppose it would make sense. However, on a successful job export would we want people to be able to relaunch with the same commit message?

[john-westcott-iv]

Like we talked about earlier, I would be interested in seeing if we can associate a Tower credential to the project and use that instead of obtaining an oauth token behind the scenes.

@shanemcd @wenottingham If we use a Tower credential type for the project export it has a field called Ansible Tower Hostname (thats required). I feel like I should respect this when making the connection to Tower (right now I use TOWER_URL_BASE setting). This could lead to awkwardness on an export if someone does not populate that correctly. Any thoughts on this?

[unlikelyzero]

@john-westcott-iv , i'll take a stab at testing this from the ui-side when you're ready for review

[softwarefactory-project-zuul]

Build succeeded.

• awx-api-lint : SUCCESS in 1m 51s
• awx-api : SUCCESS in 8m 41s
• awx-ui : SUCCESS in 10m 07s
• awx-swagger : SUCCESS in 9m 36s
• awx-detect-schema-change : FAILURE in 7m 53s (non-voting)
• awx-ansible-modules : SUCCESS in 2m 45s

[shanemcd]

Holy conflicts. Please let me know if you still want this.

[john-westcott-iv]

I def sill want it but didn't have the time to put it in before the 4.0 release so this will have to be completely refactored later. Closing for now.