rename validate_zimfile_creatable to validate_file_creatable

[elfkuzco]

Rationale

This PR renames the validate_zimfile_creatable method to validate_file_creatable to reflect its general applicability to check file creation beyond ZIM files. This resolves #200

Changes

• Add validate_folder_creatable function to check if a folder can be written to.
• Add validate_file_creatable function to check if a file with a given filename can be created in a given folder
• Delegate validate_zimfile_creatable to use validate_file_creatable method with deprecation warning.
• Add tests for new functions

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (ea6505f) to head (632d506).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #210   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           38        38           
  Lines         2221      2227    +6     
  Branches       426       426           
=========================================
+ Hits          2221      2227    +6     

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

[benoit74]

Thank you, I like the fact that we expose the method on folder, this is what I needed in another scraper indeed.

I think this is the typical example of something for which we do not want to maintain backward compatibility (we discussed about it with the team yesterday). Keeping old exception names is just weird / confusing.

I propose that we consider this as a real breaking change and:

• rename all exceptions to remove any "ZIM" reference in their name (and clearly document these renaming in the changelog so that it is easier for scraperlib users to know about it)
• completely drop the validate_zimfile_creatable method
• bump version in __about__.py to 5.0.0-dev0 to indicate this will need a major (we already had doubts about whether other changes of the scraperlib deserved a major or not, this is somehow providing a good answer ^^)

@rgaudin OK for you?

[rgaudin]

Yes, fine with me.

I'd suggest we use a dedicated subsection in the changelog (### Breaking Changes instead of prefixing individual changes with BREAKING). I find is more practical

[benoit74]

I'd suggest we use a dedicated subsection in the changelog (### Breaking Changes instead of prefixing individual changes with BREAKING). I find is more practical

Agreed. Let's add it to the bootstrap: openzim/_python-bootstrap#50