feat: add methods to remove existing failure modes

[weibullguy]

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• Yes
• No

Describe the purpose of this pull request.

To remove existing failure modes whenever a component's category or subcategory change.

Describe how this was implemented.

Added two methods to the FMEA panel to respond to category and subcategory changes. These are wrappers for the method that requests deletion of each mode and clearing the FMEA worksheet.

Describe any particular area(s) reviewers should focus on.

None

Provide any other pertinent information.

Closes #32

Pull Request Checklist

• Code Style

  • Code is following code style guidelines.

• Static Checks

  • Failing static checks are only applicable to code outside the scope of
    this PR.

• Tests

  • At least one test for all newly created functions/methods?

• Chores

  • Issue(s) have been raised for problem areas outside the scope of
    this PR. These problem areas have been decorated with an ISSUE: # comment.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1068 (9c39a66) into master (5e6bee6) will increase coverage by 0.12%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1068      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   95.46%   95.59%   +0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         155      155              
  Lines        5582     5586       +4     
  Branches      611      612       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         5329     5340      +11     
+ Misses        226      221       -5     
+ Partials       27       25       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
3.10	95.59% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
3.7	95.59% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
3.8	95.59% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
3.9	95.59% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/ramstk/models/dbtables/basetable.py	98.54% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
src/ramstk/configuration.py	89.83% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
src/ramstk/models/db/basedatabase.py	88.65% <100.00%> (+4.96%)	⬆️
src/ramstk/models/db/program_database.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5e6bee6...9c39a66. Read the comment docs.

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

✅  Merging this PR will increase code quality in the affected files by 0.14%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	1.35 ⭐	1.34 ⭐	-0.01 👍
Method Length	82.82 🙂	81.18 🙂	-1.64 👍
Working memory	5.64 ⭐	5.63 ⭐	-0.01 👍
Quality	78.03% ⭐	78.17% ⭐	0.14% 👍

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	13196	13468	272

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
src/ramstk/configuration.py	62.55% 🙂	62.34% 🙂	-0.21% 👎
src/ramstk/models/db/basedatabase.py	71.30% 🙂	70.68% 🙂	-0.62% 👎
src/ramstk/models/db/program_database.py	88.43% ⭐	87.45% ⭐	-0.98% 👎
src/ramstk/models/dbtables/basetable.py	77.29% ⭐	77.50% ⭐	0.21% 👍
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/fmea/panel.py	78.44% ⭐	78.73% ⭐	0.29% 👍
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/fmea/view.py	81.00% ⭐	83.26% ⭐	2.26% 👍
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/hardware/panel.py	68.46% 🙂	68.35% 🙂	-0.11% 👎
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/hardware/view.py	80.78% ⭐	80.77% ⭐	-0.01% 👎
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/stakeholder/panel.py	79.25% ⭐	79.25% ⭐	0.00%
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/widgets/baseview.py	83.62% ⭐	83.62% ⭐	0.00%
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/widgets/panel.py	79.77% ⭐	79.82% ⭐	0.05% 👍
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/widgets/treeview.py	74.98% 🙂	74.91% 🙂	-0.07% 👎
tests/conftest.py	79.43% ⭐	79.57% ⭐	0.14% 👍
tests/test_configuration.py	75.23% ⭐	75.12% ⭐	-0.11% 👎
tests/db/test_base.py	83.82% ⭐	84.13% ⭐	0.31% 👍
tests/models/programdb/conftest.py	84.47% ⭐	84.47% ⭐	0.00%
tests/models/programdb/test_program_manager.py	85.86% ⭐	85.34% ⭐	-0.52% 👎
tests/models/programdb/environment/conftest.py	79.44% ⭐	79.44% ⭐	0.00%
tests/models/programdb/mission/conftest.py	90.57% ⭐	90.57% ⭐	0.00%
tests/models/programdb/mission_phase/conftest.py	85.92% ⭐	85.92% ⭐	0.00%
tests/models/programdb/stakeholder/conftest.py	82.00% ⭐	82.00% ⭐	0.00%

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/hardware/panel.py	HardwareGeneralDataPanel.__init__	0 ⭐	441 ⛔	18 ⛔	39.76% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
tests/test_configuration.py	TestCreateConfiguration.test_initialize_user_configuration	6 ⭐	403 ⛔	11 😞	43.19% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
src/ramstk/configuration.py	RAMSTKUserConfiguration.__init__	2 ⭐	429 ⛔	13 😞	43.53% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
src/ramstk/views/gtk3/widgets/treeview.py	CellRendererML.do_start_editing	4 ⭐	292 ⛔	13 😞	44.30% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
src/ramstk/models/db/basedatabase.py	BaseDatabase.do_connect	5 ⭐	215 ⛔	14 😞	45.76% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!

[sonarqubecloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
7 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication