Fix sqlglot dependency conflict with superset 4 and fix superset auth/reauth to use only the API

[joaopamaral]

There is a conflict with superset 4 dependencies and using only the API to authenticate it's better than using web scraping tool to avoid unexpected issues when the UI changes.

[joaopamaral]

Hi @Vitor-Avila! Sorry, I've missed your comment.

I've bumped the sqlglot to use the same version of the latest superset and fixed some expression loops for the new version (now only tests/cli/superset/sync/dbt/metrics_test.py::test_replace_metric_syntax test is failing). As you said, the jinja template bug for dbt queries remains. I'll try to detect the block start {{ and block end }} and make the tokens between as a placeholder to allow it to run without changing the content. The {% %} is correctly identified as block start/end but the content between is defined as a variable and not placeholder (so it's failing to parse).

I've noticed that for this test we have a ParseError in the past (captured in the exception), but in the new sqlglot new version it parse both {{ }} as STRUCT(STRUCT()) and not raise this exception.

[joaopamaral]

I've added the replace_jinja_tokens to make sqlglot identify {{/}} it as a block start/end.

backend-sdk/src/preset_cli/cli/superset/sync/dbt/metrics.py

Lines 126 to 135 in 86f5ad6

	def replace_jinja_tokens(tokens: List[Token]) -> List[Token]:
	"""
	Replaces Jinja-style `{{` and `}}` as block start/end.
	Args:
	tokens (List[Token]): List of tokens to process.
	Returns:
	List[Token]: List of tokens with Jinja blocks replaced.
	"""

All tests are passing now.

[Vitor-Avila]

Hey @joaopamaral,

Checking this PR, I can see the following changes:

• sqlglot bump (and required fixes)
• Changes to the Superset client
• Changes to the Superset auth flow
• Changes to the Makefile

I left some first pass comments, but I'm wondering if we should actually split this work into individual PRs? This would allow us to merge them individually as we make progress.

It seems that the CLA signature also didn't reflect properly FYI.

[joaopamaral]

Hi @Vitor-Avila! Thanks for the review!
Sure we can split into more PRs!
I'll work on it during the weekend.

[Vitor-Avila]

No rush @joaopamaral. And thank YOU for these contributions. We really appreciate it 🙌