Replace deprecated pkg_resources

[kratman]

Description

While looking through the code, I noticed a deprecation warning for pkg_resources. I replaced the two usages I found in the code with importlib.metadata.

Type of change

Only changes an imported library, there should be no real changes to the functionality.

Key checklist:

• No style issues: $ pre-commit run (or $ nox -s pre-commit) (see CONTRIBUTING.md for how to set this up to run automatically when committing locally, in just two lines of code)
• All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --all (or $ nox -s tests)
• The documentation builds: $ python run-tests.py --doctest (or $ nox -s doctests)

You can run integration tests, unit tests, and doctests together at once, using $ python run-tests.py --quick (or $ nox -s quick).

Further checks:

• Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: -0.02% ⚠️

Comparison is base (8af2430) 99.57% compared to head (31c362d) 99.56%.
Report is 30 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3335      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    99.57%   99.56%   -0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          253      253              
  Lines        19571    19559      -12     
===========================================
- Hits         19488    19474      -14     
- Misses          83       85       +2     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
pybamm/parameters/parameter_sets.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
pybamm/util.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

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

[kratman]

The drop in coverage appears to be from the code in #3116, not the changes from this PR

[agriyakhetarpal]

Thanks for this @kratman. I have been doing the same thing in #3301 😄

[kratman]

@agriyakhetarpal I did not see the changes there when I went to do this. This one is small and ready to go though.

I rebased yesterday to see if it would retrigger the coverage report which was showing a drop due to a different merged PR. It passed everything else before I did the rebase.

[agriyakhetarpal]

Yes, that PR is a bit stalled though, for other reasons. The changes there are similar to yours and everything passes, I expect them to pass here too

[kratman]

The failing tests (nox -s examples) for this PR are failing on develop as well.

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[agriyakhetarpal]

Looks good to me, thanks! @Saransh-cpp, could you trigger a workflow run here?

[kratman]

@Saransh-cpp, @agriyakhetarpal It looks like coverage is dropping due to the version logic. Is there something else you want me to change, or is this OK?

[agriyakhetarpal]

Perhaps adding # pragma: no cover on the conditional should be okay in this case

[Saransh-cpp]

Perhaps adding # pragma: no cover on the conditional should be okay in this case

Yes, should be fine in this case.

[kratman]

Changed thanks

[Saransh-cpp]

Thanks, @kratman!