core, editoast: rename rolling stock to physics consist

[woshilapin]

Now that consists are supported instead of a single traction engine (named rolling stock in the entire application), it's reasonable to rename all along up to core.

It's a follow up of #9106.

❓ In core, I changed PhysicsRollingStockModel into PhysicsConsistModel. But there is also RollingStockParser which converts a PhysicsConsistModel into a RollingStock: I'm not sure how far I should push the renaming. Is RollingStock only about physics? Because RollingStock contains also information about identifier, or supportedSignalingSystems which not really be about the physics of the rolling stock?

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 38.20%. Comparing base (9dedb37) to head (35146ac).
Report is 263 commits behind head on dev.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #9665      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   38.21%   38.20%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         992      992              
  Lines       92158    92159       +1     
  Branches     1186     1186              
==========================================
- Hits        35217    35207      -10     
- Misses      56490    56501      +11     
  Partials      451      451              

Flag	Coverage Δ
editoast	73.34% <100.00%> (-0.04%)	⬇️
front	20.18% <ø> (ø)
gateway	2.18% <ø> (ø)
osrdyne	3.28% <ø> (ø)
railjson_generator	87.49% <ø> (ø)
tests	87.00% <ø> (ø)

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[flomonster]

LGTM

[eckter]

LGTM

❓ In core, I changed PhysicsRollingStockModel into PhysicsConsistModel. But there is also RollingStockParser which converts a PhysicsConsistModel into a RollingStock: I'm not sure how far I should push the renaming. Is RollingStock only about physics? Because RollingStock contains also information about identifier, or supportedSignalingSystems which not really be about the physics of the rolling stock?

I feel like a "rolling stock" is supposed to be "anything that can move on tracks". There's some semantics issues around identifiers and such, but I feel like we'd need to think more carefully about what we precisely intent there, we'd need to take some time to discuss all of this.

We should probably do it eventually, but maybe not quite yet

[woshilapin]

@eckter I agree that, literally, rolling stock means what you said. But this term comes with the history of OSRD which actually associate rolling stock with: "something that has traction capability". Therefore, rolling stock today can be misunderstood, and I'd prefer to move to these terms instead:

1. traction engine (some part of editoast already adopted that),
2. towed rolling stock (since this feature is recent, I believe it's already relatively homogeneous everywhere),
3. consist

What do you think? And yes, we can discuss it.

[eckter]

@woshilapin

Sorry I didn't really see the answer. I didn't mean to block this, it's fine as it is.

In the context of core, we don't really consider the distinction between "anything that moves on track" or "anything with traction", or even consists and such. We don't handle the database and we don't assemble anything together. So it doesn't really matter either way in this context, we can go with whatever is consistent with the rest of the codebase.

The distinction between RollingStock and PhysicsRollingStock is mostly "legacy", I think it's related to circular dependencies between modules. The string identifier isn't really used as far as I know.