chore(api): scenario cost surfaces shell

[kgajowy]

Proposal of flow/structures for cost surface shapefile upload

Overview

Please write a description. If the PR is hard to understand, provide a quick explanation of the code.

Designs

Link to the related design prototypes (if applicable)

Testing instructions

Please explain how to test the PR: ID of a dataset, steps to reach the feature, etc.

Feature relevant tickets

https://vizzuality.atlassian.net/browse/MARXAN-291

---

Checklist before submitting

• Meaningful commits and code rebased on develop.
• If this PR adds feature that should be tested for regressions when
  deploying to staging/production, please add brief testing instructions
  to the deploy checklist (docs/deployment-checklist.md)
• Update CHANGELOG file

[vercel]

This pull request is being automatically deployed with Vercel (learn more).
To see the status of your deployments, click below or on the icon next to each commit.

marxan – ./app

🔍 Inspect: https://vercel.com/vizzuality1/marxan/FKPKyAo9rzG29zjvap36nBufq3Za
✅ Preview: https://marxan-git-chore-marxan-291-shell-vizzuality1.vercel.app

marxan-storybook – ./app

🔍 Inspect: https://vercel.com/vizzuality1/marxan-storybook/B7Jy7PuvtSFF4VFkNEwww45BHGue
✅ Preview: https://marxan-storybook-git-chore-marxan-291-shell-vizzuality1.vercel.app

[hotzevzl]

@kgajowy thank you. The shell looks ok. I would still prefer to have geo-jobs be self-contained in the geoprocessing service, especially where we don't need to send back anything to the API client, but between ApiEvents and other bits, it's true that there is quite some code we'd need to share or (heavens forbid) duplicate between API and geoprocessing service.

In this case, maybe we could simplify the process a bit by handling just a bit more than shp->geojson transformation in the geoprocessing service: we'll only need the id of each planning unit and the associated cost, so we can get the geoprocessing service to return that, and get back a (potentially) much smaller payload

[hotzevzl]

this could probably be a plain list of ids and associated cost value

[kgajowy]

I would refrain from putting more logic there. We already have analysis module which handles validation of integrity and persistence - the facade is "only" connecting those two pieces together (i.e. rest->shapefile->geo->process)

[kgajowy]

Revisited in 1a12fbb