[Datahub] Add reuse metadata support

[AlitaBernachot]

Description

This PR adds the support of the new type of metadata: Reuse metadata, for:

• gn4 (read),
• iso19139 (read/write)
• and iso19115-3 (read-write).

Architectural changes

The new ReuseRecord Metadata Model has been added

export interface ReuseRecord extends BaseRecord {
  kind: 'reuse'
  lineage: string // Explanation of the origin of this record (e.g: how, why)"
  onlineResources: Array<OnlineLinkResource>
  reuseType: ReuseType
  spatialExtents: Array<DatasetSpatialExtent>
  temporalExtents: Array<DatasetTemporalExtent>
}

along with with ReuseType

export type ReuseType = 'application' | 'map' | 'other'

Quality Assurance Checklist

• Commit history is devoid of any merge commits and readable to facilitate reviews
• If new logic ⚙️ is introduced: unit tests were added
• If new user stories 🤏 are introduced: E2E tests were added
• If new UI components 🕹️ are introduced: corresponding stories in Storybook were created
• If breaking changes 🪚 are introduced: add the breaking change label
• If bugs 🐞 are fixed: add the backport <release branch> label
• The documentation website 📚 has received the love it deserves

[github-actions]

Affected libs: api-metadata-converter,
Affected apps: metadata-converter,

• 🚀 Build and deploy storybook and demo on GitHub Pages
• 📦 Build and push affected docker images

[github-actions]

📷 Screenshots are here!

[coveralls]

coverage: 84.324% (-1.3%) from 85.592%
when pulling 7b3d945 on GSIGNGPF-49-reuse-metadata-support
into 8d1c028 on main.

[jahow]

That looks really good, great work! I added a couple of comments to make a few things a little bit clearer, but apart from that it's all good. Please merge once you've addressed the comments as you see fit :)

[jahow]

Suggested change

	reuseType,
	...(reuseType || { reuseType }),

We should not write this key if the reuseType is undefined

[AlitaBernachot]

Right! I updated the gn4 field mapper and added a ut for this specific use case.

[jahow]

This looks potentially confusing; maybe we can still have a "reuseType" writer and simply call the "kind" writer inside? At least we would have a homogeneous logic everywhere, even if it's an unnecessary step

[AlitaBernachot]

Ok I have added a new writer for reuseType that is calling the kind writer.