Refactor + tests for Apprise custom integration

[xLinkOut]

This PR aims to refactor the Apprise custom integration to improve its readability, maintainability, and code coverage by introducing new tests and adding several features. The changelog follow the Keep a Changelog format.

Added

• Extended HTTP method support for Apprise custom handlers:
  • Added support for PATCH and HEAD methods
• Comprehensive test suite for the Apprise custom integration

Fixed

• Corrected a typo in authentication credentials handling, where the password was being ignored, and the username was set twice instead
• Improved handling of parameter processing
• In ValidateAppRiseServers, Apprise custom handlers are now correctly loaded

Changed

• Refactored code structure:
  • Moved all Apprise-related code to the apprise_plugin folder
  • Used appropriate file names instead of putting code in __init__.py
• Apprise assets:
  • Saved assets into constants for easy reuse
  • Directly pass assets into the AppriseAsset constructor
• Custom handler implementation:
  • Following Apprise documentation, handlers now return a boolean (True/False) instead of raising exceptions
  • Use requests.request() instead of dynamically retrieving method aliases
  • Split custom handler function into other small fuctions for improved testability and maintainability

Finally, I've manually tested some custom URLs notification:

get://localhost:8080
get://localhost:8080?user_id=123&action=list
get://localhost:8080?search_term=hello%20world&category=test%20category
get://username:password@localhost:8080
get://localhost:8080?+content-type=application/json&+x-api-key=secret-key
get://admin:secretpass@localhost:8080?+content-type=application/xml&+x-request-id=unique-request
post://localhost:8080?+content-type=application/json
post://user:pass@localhost:8080?+content-type=application/json&+x-correlation-id=123456
post://localhost:8080?param1=value1&param2=value2&+content-type=application/json&+x-custom-header=special-value
post://localhost:8080?+content-type=application/x-www-form-urlencoded&username=testuser&password=testpass

[dgtlmoon]

"and adding several features"

I see PATCH and HEAD, what else was changed/added?

[dgtlmoon]

And can I ask, why? whats the background here? how did you come to this point?

[dgtlmoon]

Could you explain this to me? how does this work?

[xLinkOut]

pytest.mark.parametrize allows you to reuse the same test code with different parameters. For example, test_get_headers tests header parsing starting from different URLs, for which the expected result is known.
It's like doing a for loop on a single test, but in a much cleaner and more concise way (standard for pytest).

[xLinkOut]

I'm using this custom handler to send callbacks to my other services with the differences detected. So I took a look at the code to better understand how it works.
As I mentioned in the other Ruff PR, I'm happy to contribute to this project with what I can. I noticed that the test coverage for this particular component was low (calculated with the coverage package), so I started writing a test suite specifically for the custom handler.
And from there, everything else followed - the tests allowed me to identify and fix bugs, and make the technical improvements I mentioned (I would say that, objectively, the code is now more maintainable in the long term, and certainly more readable and testable).
In addition, I added support for the two missing HTTP methods (PATCH in particular I find useful for interacting with other RESTful services, where you modify an existing resource). The "why" you're looking for is this, and also because this component seemed sufficiently isolated from the rest, and a good starting point to make changes to the project's code.

[dgtlmoon]

OK super nice, thanks so much! yes its better to move that code to its own file, PATCH and HEAD are also super handy!

[dgtlmoon]

Just one thing

Corrected a typo in authentication credentials handling, where the password was being ignored, and the username was set twice instead

Was there a test for this? and it wasnt caught or?

grazie!

[xLinkOut]

I didn't find a specific test for that case, I think there isn't a process_notification test that has, as destination url, an url that includes the authentication parameters. The bug (on master) is in apprise_plugin/__init__.py:52

if results.get('user') and results.get('password'):
    auth = (unquote_plus(results.get('user')), unquote_plus(results.get('user')))

Prego!

[dgtlmoon]

If you could kindly add a test for that situation then I think this code is ready to merge :)

[xLinkOut]

Sure, it's already included in test_apprise_custom_api_call.py:test_get_auth, line 26.

Four different scenarios:

• no auth
• auth with only username
• auth with both
• auth with both username and password, but encoded

If you know any other scenario(s) to test, let me know!