[DaanHoogland]

Description

This PR tries to get rid of the Config enum or the old mechanism to define configuration items, which is long overdue. The change should be transparent, but is huge so good regression testing is required. And merg early in the release cycle is recommended.
Commits are being done in batches for review convenience. They could have been done in separate PRs but in the end the changes are rather trivial.

Fixes: #10752

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• Build/CI
• Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 3.88%. Comparing base (b9b5436) to head (5b56802).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (b9b5436) and HEAD (5b56802). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (b9b5436)	HEAD (5b56802)
unittests	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #13884       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage     20.75%    3.88%   -16.88%     
=============================================
  Files          6496      493     -6003     
  Lines        591602    42571   -549031     
  Branches      72583     8069    -64514     
=============================================
- Hits         122814     1653   -121161     
+ Misses       455456    40687   -414769     
+ Partials      13332      231    -13101     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.88% <ø> (ø)
unittests	?

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

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

🔴 Test Coverage Grade: D — Marginal

Metric	Value
Line coverage	25.51%
Branch coverage	19.83%

Grade Scale

Grade	Line Coverage	Meaning
🟢 A	≥ 80%	Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴
🟡 B	60-79%	Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉
🟠 C	40-59%	Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬
🔴 D	20-39%	Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖
⛔ F	< 20%	Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥

Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run