Support register custom OpSchema by python

[OYCN]

Description

• Add a python interface to register the OpSchema.
• Add a python interface to deregister the OpSchema.
• Avoid the value error when executing OpSchema::Finalize multiple times
• Add flag to enable check node for custom domain
• overload onnx.defs.has with version parameter

example for register OpSchema:

op_schema = defs.OpSchema(
    "CustomOp",
    "",
    1,
)
onnx.defs.register_schema(op_schema)

example for deregister OpSchema:

onnx.defs.deregister_schema('CustomOp', 1)

Motivation and Context

Follow up of #5019

[xadupre]

Why reg_schema and not register_schema which seems easier to understand? Should we check that has_schema returns True as well? Should we add a method to unregister a schema?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.75000% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 56.79%. Comparing base (06548e4) to head (ce63fbc).

Files	Patch %	Lines
onnx/test/schema_test.py	98.50%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5906      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   56.68%   56.79%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         506      506              
  Lines       30231    30308      +77     
  Branches     4566     4580      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits        17137    17214      +77     
+ Misses      12268    12267       -1     
- Partials      826      827       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[OYCN]

Why reg_schema and not register_schema which seems easier to understand?

You're right, register_schema is indeed clearer than reg_schema. I will update the naming to register_schema

Should we check that has_schema returns True as well ?

has_schema function will checks if the domain::name exist, and we need also check the version .

Should we add a method to unregister a schema ?

This is a good suggestion. I plan to implement this in the upcoming commit.

This is my first time submitting a PR. I'll do my best to learn and get better at this! 😃

[justinchuby]

Could you follow https://github.com/onnx/onnx/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#coding-style to fix lint errors reported in https://github.com/onnx/onnx/actions/runs/7783887025/job/21232428145?pr=5906 ? Thanks!

[justinchuby]

Thank you for your contribution! This is much needed.

[gramalingam]

LGTM ... the one question is whether to include it or not in the upcoming release, which has a deadline next weekend or so. Any opinions/thoughts welcome.

[justinchuby]

I think it would be beneficial to include this which will allow us to do further validation on models. If anything comes up we can always revert the PR and stage it for the next release.

That said, I don't have a strong opinion

[gramalingam]

@OYCN : can you please take a look at the merge conflicts? We can try to merge this PR in this week, ahead of the next release cutoff.

[gramalingam]

Merge conflicts to be resolved, LGTM otherwise.

[OYCN]

The merge conflicts have been resolved. But some Windows-CI failing during the CMake configuration process. This might be due to an external problem?