[CT-2968] [ModelGov3] Allow access to be set as config, including in dbt_project.yml

[jtcohen6]

Housekeeping

• I am a maintainer of dbt-core

Short description

Allow users to set access like any other config, including in dbt_project.yml, so that an entire subfolder of models can be marked access: private or access: public.

While there is a risk of users accidentally promoting a set of intermediate models to public access, we should make this promotion / "FYI" flow part of the UX in dbt Cloud, rather than a restriction within the framework of dbt-core.

Acceptance criteria

As an end user, I can set access in three places:

• in-file using {{ config() }} (Jinja-SQL models) or dbt.config() (Python models)
• in config: block within yaml properties (in addition to current top-level key, for back-compat)
• in dbt_project.yml for all models in a subfolder

As a metadata consumer, nothing changes — access should always be promoted to a node-level attribute in manifest.json (similar to meta or `tags).

• IMO we don't need to keep it inside the config dict if we promote it to a top-level node attribute (à la our thinking from a few months ago for: [CT-2296] [Spike] Remove the distinction between configs and non-configs #7157)

Impact to Adapters

zero impact

Context

Context & conversation:

• [CT-2578] [Feature] Hierarchical access config in dbt_project.yml #7619

[graciegoheen]

From estimation meeting: there may be some test cases that need to be added and some test cases that will need to be updated

[jaklan]

UPDATE: I have tried to recreate the issue by myself today (the initial one was reported by @jamyz89), but I wasn't able to - it worked as expected. We will try to investigate it on our side what was the reason.

---

Hi guys, is it expected behaviour that group config is not applied to all the subdirectories (== is not inherited)?

Such setup:

gives us:

Parsing Error
  Node model.gtm_glo_src.data_source_x attempted to reference node model.gtm_glo_src.data_source_x_raw, which is not allowed because the referenced node is private to the 'data_sources' group.

cc: @gshank

[kogutj]

Attached meta.txt for the context to the above. Seems like those 3 models are in the same group data_sources, as expected, however data_source_x cannot ref to the private model data_source_x_raw.
meta.txt

[graciegoheen]

^ I initially thought your issue might have been related to this bug #8697 but it looks like that was already resolved. Please let me know if you run into the same issue again!