Add version to output

[dave-connors-3]

Closes #425

This is a:

• bug fix PR with no breaking changes
• new functionality

Link to Issue

This PR

• adds version and deprecation_date to our unpack macros
• updates the resource names to include the version if present -- for example model.my_project.my_model.v1 would have been identified as my_model in all rules in the project before this change, and will be identified as my_model.v1 after this change. model.my_project.my_unversioned_model would be identified as my_unversioned_model before and after this change

Description & motivation

This is a more correct representation of the nodes in the project, and disambiguates situations where more than one version of a model violates a rule, or when a versioned model is referenced only by name in a rule output

Integration Test Screenshot

Checklist

• I have verified that these changes work locally on the following warehouses (Note: it's okay if you do not have access to all warehouses, this helps us understand what has been covered)
  • BigQuery
  • Postgres
  • Redshift
  • Snowflake
  • Databricks
  • DuckDB
  • Trino/Starburst
• I have updated the README.md (if applicable)
• I have added tests & descriptions to my models (and macros if applicable)

[b-per]

Very weird, but for some reason DuckDB has a bug/issue with rounding a float when using except.

Here is the diff:

A hack that seems to work is to just not test this column on DuckDB:

    tests:
      - dbt_utils.equality:
          name: equality_fct_test_coverage
          compare_model: ref('fct_test_coverage')
          compare_columns:
            - total_models
            - total_tests
            - tested_models
            - "{{ 'test_coverage_pct' if not target.name == 'duckdb' else 'tested_models' }}"
            - test_to_model_ratio
            - staging_test_coverage_pct
            - intermediate_test_coverage_pct
            - marts_test_coverage_pct
            - other_test_coverage_pct

[b-per]

DuckDB 0.10 is out as well but the bug on the check still exists on the new version

[dave-connors-3]

@b-per @graciegoheen looks like the only failure here is another weird decimal rounding issue in the test:

    {
      "which_diff": "a_minus_b",
      "total_models": 18,
      "total_tests": 13,
      "tested_models": 6,
      "test_coverage_pct": 33.33000183105469,
      "test_to_model_ratio": 0.7222,
      "staging_test_coverage_pct": 80.0,
      "intermediate_test_coverage_pct": 25.0,
      "marts_test_coverage_pct": 0.0,
      "other_test_coverage_pct": 25.0
    },
    {
      "which_diff": "b_minus_a",
      "total_models": 18,
      "total_tests": 13,
      "tested_models": 6,
      "test_coverage_pct": 33.33,
      "test_to_model_ratio": 0.7222,
      "staging_test_coverage_pct": 80.0,
      "intermediate_test_coverage_pct": 25.0,
      "marts_test_coverage_pct": 0.0,
      "other_test_coverage_pct": 25.0
    }
  ]
}

not sure it's worth fretting about or if this one can just get merged in!

[b-per]

@dave, could you treat databricks and trino the same way we did for DuckDB so that this particular column is not tested?
That way, CI should continue passing.

[dave-connors-3]

@b-per done!

[graciegoheen]

Why this vs. a new field called "version"?

[dave-connors-3]

i add that on line 87!

[graciegoheen]

ope - yes, thank you!