Make test_framework available for users when creating scenarios

[pinheadmz]

This changes two important things about how scenarios are written:

1. Scenario files must be in a directory next to test_framework
2. Scenario files must have a main() function, instead of (or in addition to) the __name__ == "__main__" logic:

example:

def main():
    ConnectDag().main()

Projects

When a user creates a project, they will get a scenarios/ directory which includes our default scenarios like miner_std.py as well as a complete copy of test_framework. They are welcome to edit the framework, the code in that directory is actually deployed.

Running Scenarios

When executing warnet run <path> this PR bundles up the scenario file, commander.py and the entire test_framework directory into a .pyz archive which is compressed, base64 encoded, and added to a volume via an initContainer that is deployed along with a vanilla, unmodified image of python:3.12-slim.

Side effects

The grossest thing about this PR in my opinion is that all the scenarios we use only for tests have to be moved as well, so they are in a directory with test_framework. To deal with that, I adjusted the "exclude" logic in copy_scenario_defaults() to filter by regex and then exclude testscenario_*.py.

TODO

• add a test that calls warnet init on an empty directory, runs a network and scenario from there to fully test the user flow (reccomend reviewers do this!)

[bdp-DrahtBot]

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #616 (Kubeconfig Step Thru by mplsgrant)
• #614 (swap out kubectl by mplsgrant)

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

[m3dwards]

LGTM. I changed the test_framework and I checked that this change was reflected the next time I ran a scenario. Will be very useful!