fix: job type issues after new sdk generation

[martin-trajanovski]

Description

Short description of the pull request

Motivation

Background on use case, changes needed

Fixes:

Please provide a list of the fixes implemented in this PR

• Items added

Changes:

Please provide a list of the changes implemented by this PR

• changes made

Tests included

• Included for each change/fix?
• Passing? (Merge will not be approved unless this is checked)

Documentation

• swagger documentation updated [required]
• official documentation updated [nice-to-have]

official documentation info

If you have updated the official documentation, please provide PR # and URL of the pages where the updates are included

Backend version

• Does it require a specific version of the backend
• which version of the backend is required:

Summary by Sourcery

Update job-related services and components to work with a new SDK generation, addressing type compatibility issues

Bug Fixes:

• Resolve type incompatibilities introduced by new SDK generation in job-related services and components

Enhancements:

• Update method calls to use V3 versions of job controller methods
• Modify type annotations to use 'any' to maintain compatibility with new SDK

[martin-trajanovski]

@despadam I hope this is not blocked by anything else at the moment. I see that you are continuously working on it but please feel free to let me know if there is something that I can help with.

[despadam]

Hi @martin-trajanovski, it is not blocked by anything else, do not worry. The issue is that the are major differences in the Jobs DTOs between v3 and v4 in regards to how we handle authorization and we need to pass some additional fields which are not very straight-forward to get. It is a work in progress though, hopefully to be resolved soon :)

[martin-trajanovski]

Hi @martin-trajanovski, it is not blocked by anything else, do not worry. The issue is that the are major differences in the Jobs DTOs between v3 and v4 in regards to how we handle authorization and we need to pass some additional fields which are not very straight-forward to get. It is a work in progress though, hopefully to be resolved soon :)

Good to know. Thank you for your explanation.