feat: LHCb modules migration

[AcquaDiGiorgio]

See #87

First approach, needs review.

I tried to use the current Mock classes (MockDataManager), but I don't think this is the correct way. However, it should not vary much.

I open it as a draft because I still need to create 2 more tests and change the interactions with DIRAC.

[AcquaDiGiorgio]

There is an issue with the FailoverRequest.
The DIRAC's workflow, during the finalize phase calls sendFailoverRequest, which through the ReqClient sends the stored requests at the workflow_commons dictionary to DIRAC.
Currently, in dirac-cwl we don't have persitency between command executions, so the operations created are lost.

[AcquaDiGiorgio]

This PR will now tackle the migration of every single module (starting from the ones used in MCSim) by importing LHCb specific functions instead of rewritting them from the ground up

[aldbr]

Also based on my previous comment in the WorkflowAccounting: it would be interesting to see whether there is a way to get the status of the cwl execution vs a step execution.

Because if this is possible, then may be there is a way to reproduce exactly what we have in the workflow modules with the conditions like if workflowStatus and jobStatus...

[aldbr]

Are you sure it works?

[AcquaDiGiorgio]

Why wouldn't it?
When the command execution ends, the registers are extracted from the client and stored for later use.

[aldbr]

There might be a way of having one step per CWL workflow step.
Check the workflow examples we have here (this is not MCSim but it's very similar): https://gitlab.cern.ch/lhcb-dpa/analysis-productions/lbapcommon/-/blob/master/tests/example_workflows/complex_workflow_with_filtering/AnaProd_example_workflows_job_tuple%2Csplit%2Cfilter_B0.cwl?ref_type=heads

[AcquaDiGiorgio]

Okay, I will look into this