Add teacher/judge section to ilab form

[DaoDaoNoCode]

JIRA: RHOAIENG-19108

Description

Added 2 similar sections to the form: Teacher model and Judge model. Here are the descriptions.

1. Added validation to these 2 sections. When the public endpoint is chosen, it doesn't require a token to be input. When the private endpoint is selected, it requires the token field not to be empty. Also, the endpoint field needs to follow the URI format.
2. I leave the links to the docs in the description as empty for now
3. When submitting, it will create 2 separate secrets for both teacher and judge. There are 3 fields in the secrets: api_token, 'endpoint' and model_name. When it's public, the api_token field will be set as empty string.
4. The name of these 2 secrets are not decided yet, thus, after creating the 2 secrets, the corresponding parameters in the pipeline run form are not decided, either. I added some TODO comments to it.

How Has This Been Tested?

1. Test whether the submit button is disabled/enabled as described in the description by changing it between public/private and changing the format of the endpoint
2. Test whether submitting it will create 2 secrets

Test Impact

Added unit tests for the validation
Added cypress tests for the 2 sections

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

• The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
• Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
• The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

• Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
• Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change.

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

• The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 54.60993% with 64 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 84.62%. Comparing base (652b75c) to head (19c45b6).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...s/global/modelCustomization/FineTunePageFooter.tsx	18.60%	35 Missing ⚠️
frontend/src/api/k8s/secrets.ts	20.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
...pages/pipelines/global/modelCustomization/utils.ts	20.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
...mization/teacherJudgeSection/JudgeModelSection.tsx	66.66%	5 Missing ⚠️
...zation/teacherJudgeSection/TeacherModelSection.tsx	66.66%	5 Missing ⚠️
...eacherJudgeSection/TeacherJudgeInputComponents.tsx	87.50%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3777      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.67%   84.62%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files        1518     1522       +4     
  Lines       35140    35235      +95     
  Branches     9836     9854      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits        29754    29816      +62     
- Misses       5386     5419      +33     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...oncepts/pipelines/content/createRun/submitUtils.ts	90.90% <100.00%> (ø)
...rm/modelCustomizationFormSchema/validationUtils.ts	51.35% <100.00%> (+16.97%)	⬆️
...pelines/global/modelCustomization/FineTunePage.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...obal/modelCustomization/ModelCustomizationForm.tsx	81.25% <ø> (ø)
...pages/pipelines/global/modelCustomization/const.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...eacherJudgeSection/TeacherJudgeInputComponents.tsx	87.50% <87.50%> (ø)
...mization/teacherJudgeSection/JudgeModelSection.tsx	66.66% <66.66%> (ø)
...zation/teacherJudgeSection/TeacherModelSection.tsx	66.66% <66.66%> (ø)
frontend/src/api/k8s/secrets.ts	84.61% <20.00%> (-11.75%)	⬇️
...pages/pipelines/global/modelCustomization/utils.ts	20.00% <20.00%> (ø)
... and 1 more

... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 652b75c...19c45b6. Read the comment docs.

[dpanshug]

it looks good to me, just a nit

[DaoDaoNoCode]

Updated the PR, use teacher-secret-${randomChars} and judge-secret-${randomChars} as the secret names and set them to the judge_secret and teacher_secret field to the run parameters.
What's more, I added dryRun to the submit run function as well, so we can make sure we dry run everything before really creating a run, in case we really create some secrets but meet errors later when creating the run.
Now the question is - Is there a way to use the set function that's provided by the useRunFormData hook? You can see I am simply mapping the values when creating the run here instead of setting them to the run form state because I cannot do the state setting and reading simultaneously. Any ideas? cc @Gkrumbach07

[pnaik1]

The functionality and Zod validation work well. I'm also waiting for the above comment so I can also make changes in my PR accordingly

[pnaik1]

@DaoDaoNoCode , I just notice that start run button is enabled even when we dont have any value in the endpoint
Can you look at the zod validation for this??

[DaoDaoNoCode]

@pnaik1 Nice catch! I updated the zod validation functions.

[Gkrumbach07]

@DaoDaoNoCode take a look at what Purva did for here taxonomy PR
https://github.com/opendatahub-io/odh-dashboard/pull/3785/files#diff-c01f9880ad8c80ab019ba783fb672667a3199b2daabc6be55a355bf9e53e9461

we should just do something like

const [runFormData] = useRunFormData(ilabPipelineVersion);

then with on submit you do something like

handleSubmit({
   ...runFormData,
   ...translateIlabFormToPipelineInput(formData, judgeSecretName, teacherSecretName)
})

[Gkrumbach07]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Gkrumbach07

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• frontend/OWNERS [Gkrumbach07]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment