fix(tox): Address issue with generative environment variables

[john-bodley]

SUMMARY

The way the SQLite environment variables were specified were incorrect meaning that the SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI and SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_EXAMPLES_URI environment variables never adhered to the specified environment.

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

BEFORE

$ tox -e py310-mysql --showconfig | grep SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-mysql/tmp/superset.db
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_EXAMPLES_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-mysql/tmp/examples.db

$ tox -e py310-sqlite --showconfig | grep SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-sqlite/tmp/superset.db
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_EXAMPLES_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-sqlite/tmp/examples.db

AFTER

$ tox -e py310-mysql --showconfig | grep SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI=mysql://mysqluser:mysqluserpassword@localhost/superset?charset=utf8

$ tox -e py310-sqlite --showconfig | grep SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_DATABASE_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-sqlite/tmp/superset.db
  SUPERSET__SQLALCHEMY_EXAMPLES_URI=sqlite:///<redacted>/superset/.tox/py310-sqlite/tmp/examples.db

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• Has associated issue:
• Required feature flags:
• Changes UI
• Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
  • Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
  • Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
  • Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
• Introduces new feature or API
• Removes existing feature or API

[mistercrunch]

LGTM

[mistercrunch]

Hey @john-bodley taking a side-topic here, but wondering what you think of tox as part of our devex stack. I noticed it isn't used for CI anymore in favor of GHA, but has the merit to run locally - though personally I have issue running the test suites using it when I tried.

Wondering if we'd consider either dropping support for it or whether we should be using it in CI for consistency (?)

[john-bodley]

@mistercrunch it seems like act would be the way to go. Consistency is key.

The fragmentation between local and remote CI is not great. Personally I’ve wasted numerous hours/days due to inconsistencies when trying to test locally versus remote.

[mistercrunch]

Totally agreed, I love the idea of moving to act and removing tox. I'll see if I can make it work easily out of the box today. If so it'd be a matter of:

• wiping tox and everything tox-related
• documenting how to use act

Hoping it works out of the box. I'll open a DRAFT PR to track progress