feat: remove collection support for oauth

[PabloHiro]

SUMMARY

ISSUE TYPE

• Breaking Change

COMPONENT NAME

• Collection

AWX VERSION

TBD

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

[AlanCoding]

From output:

Run command with data: /root/.ansible/test/venv/sanity.runtime-metadata/3.12/c33cecd0/bin/python /root/ansible/test/lib/ansible_test/_util/controller/sanity/code-smell/runtime-metadata.py
ERROR: Found 1 runtime-metadata issue(s) which need to be resolved:
ERROR: meta/runtime.yml:0:0: Removal version must be a semantic version (https://semver.org/) for dictionary value @ data['plugin_routing']['inventory']['token']['tombstone']['removal_version']. Got 'X.Y.Z'

Our collection often can not comply with the Ansible sanity rules because of the dual-versioning system where it vendors as both ansible.controller and awx.awx which have different versions.

[PabloHiro]

@AlanCoding I think I need the CLI PR merged first. The CI fails when testing the export module, which still considers application as an exportable asset.

[hakbailey]

Just a couple of small comments, otherwise this looks good.

[AlanCoding]

The CI fails when testing the export module, which still considers application as an exportable asset.

That's just a single failure, and a legitimate point of overlap between the two PRs. I don't see any problem with us both making the same obvious change (deleting applications from options and use), and it likely won't require manual intervention in the rebase.

[AlanCoding]

One collection test needs "application" removed in one place and then this is otherwise in good shape.

[PabloHiro]

One collection test needs "application" removed in one place and then this is otherwise in good shape.

@AlanCoding The parameters are retrieved automatically from an API/and-or whatever is available in AWXKIT so that is why we would need to merge #15613 (or maybe #15588 too) first before the CI passes

[AlanCoding]

#15613 has another blocker that I'd like to not block this with. Maybe you can skip around that test or something temporarily since it'll be resolved by the other merge anyway.

Otherwise I was expecting this to merge first, but we can get together and coordinate order if needed. I'll go ahead and approve because my comment was self-evident from the checks anyway.

[AlanCoding]

Remaining issues are related to merge-order coordination. This should be otherwise ready to go and I don't see any reason to delay.

[AlanCoding]

Request to merge into feature branch

#15647

[AlanCoding]

This is the merge conflict and my branch actually has:

MERGE: fix conflicts with removal of OAuth2 token from collection branch

So there's no lack of clarity there (take this diff). We just need to formally have that happen.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud