Refactor code to properly handle reference deprecations

[gshank]

Resolves #10833

Problem

Due to some code changes we stopped reporting deprecation/upcoming deprecations for models referencing a model with a deprecation_date.

Solution

Check models that refer to a model with a deprecation date.

Checklist

• I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me.
• I have run this code in development, and it appears to resolve the stated issue.
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required or relevant for this PR.
• This PR has no interface changes (e.g., macros, CLI, logs, JSON artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc.) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX.
• This PR includes type annotations for new and modified functions.

[github-actions]

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.15%. Comparing base (ef9abe6) to head (ccea067).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10852      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.18%   89.15%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         183      183              
  Lines       23430    23430              
==========================================
- Hits        20896    20889       -7     
- Misses       2534     2541       +7     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	86.43% <100.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
unit	62.12% <0.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

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

Components	Coverage Δ
Unit Tests	62.12% <0.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
Integration Tests	86.43% <100.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

[ChenyuLInx]

Thanks for fixing this.
Given this is a regression, let's add a test to make sure this doesn't happen again.

[gshank]

There was a test. The problem was that the test wasn't being run because it was named "model_deprecations.py" instead of "test_model_deprecations.py".

[peterallenwebb]

Generally looks good, but it doesn't look like we have a test that would fail if this behavior were to regress again? If I'm right about that, can you please add one?

[danlsn]

Hi there, this issue seems to have caused failures during parsing in our dbt cloud project using the "versionless" version.

06:43:39 Encountered an error:
'exposure.dap_dbt_da.research_plus_hdr_student_activity_report'
06:43:39 Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 221, in wrapper
    result, success = func(*args, **kwargs)
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 131, in wrapper
    return func(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 329, in wrapper
    return func(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 356, in wrapper
    return func(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 404, in wrapper
    return func(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 420, in wrapper
    setup_manifest(
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/cli/requires.py", line 469, in setup_manifest
    ctx.obj["manifest"] = parse_manifest(
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/parser/manifest.py", line 2055, in parse_manifest
    manifest = ManifestLoader.get_full_manifest(
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/parser/manifest.py", line 318, in get_full_manifest
    manifest = loader.load()
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/parser/manifest.py", line 521, in load
    self.check_for_model_deprecations()
  File "/venv/dbt-149263e0c5a7b047bf5cd7b44643df173f2f8287/lib/python3.11/site-packages/dbt/parser/manifest.py", line 606, in check_for_model_deprecations
    child_node = self.manifest.nodes[child_unique_id]
                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
KeyError: 'exposure.dap_dbt_da.research_plus_hdr_student_activity_report'

This error seems to occur when our exposures depend on versioned nodes.

It seems like the fqn of the of the exposure is being used as the child_unique_id to check for deprecated models. Not entirely sure.

Our platform team is reaching out to our contact at dbt-labs but I figured it would be worth raising here as this seems to have caused another regression and is currently blocking development for our production work.

Happy to provide more information if required.