Improve predictability of DataQuery, DataID, and dependency tree

[djhoese]

Disclaimer: This PR's implementation is very rough at the time of writing.

This PR includes major changes to key parts of Satpy in order to resolve some inconsistencies noticed by users over the years. The high-level concepts that have been changed or updated are:

1. DataQuery objects are now only equal to DataID objects that match all of the queries keys. Previously only the shared keys were compared. This old way meant that a DataQuery could match a DataID that didn't contain all the necessary information requested by the query.
2. The "resolution" DataID key was not not transitive for all ID key sets. So for "default" ID keys it was False and for coordinate and minimal sets it was transitive. It made the most sense to set it to False. That is, a modified dataset is not required to have all dependencies be of the same resolution.
3. Add and refactor a lot of tests regarding DataQuery and DataID comparisons.
4. It should be possible to load a composite with two different sets of inputs (ex. DataQuery(name="comp", resolution=500), DataQuery(name="comp", resolution=1000)).

Remaining work

• There are a lot of edge cases that need to be worked out. The biggest one is what happens when a DataQuery has a list of possible options. That is not handled in a lot of my dependency tree stuff.
• See "Hindsight" below.
• Refactoring
• More explicit tests

Hindsight

For high-level change 1 above, I'm starting to think this was the wrong change or at least that the previous behavior had a good point. That is, if a user creates a query with a lot of keys to apply to many DataIDs from different sources, then not all DataIDs should be required to have all those keys. For example, if I specify a polarization in my query, then I don't think all composites or rather composite dependencies would be able to match that. There are currently no tests to verify this.

• Closes #xxxx
• Tests added
• Fully documented
• Add your name to AUTHORS.md if not there already

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.96312% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.08%. Comparing base (5984c29) to head (c45ed8d).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
satpy/dataset/id_keys.py	96.15%	5 Missing ⚠️
satpy/dependency_tree.py	83.33%	5 Missing ⚠️
satpy/dataset/dataid.py	97.50%	2 Missing ⚠️
satpy/tests/test_dependency_tree.py	98.19%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3018      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.10%   96.08%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         377      378       +1     
  Lines       55163    55213      +50     
==========================================
+ Hits        53012    53050      +38     
- Misses       2151     2163      +12     

Flag	Coverage Δ
behaviourtests	3.98% <24.72%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
unittests	96.17% <96.96%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

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

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

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 12381834226

Details

• 447 of 461 (96.96%) changed or added relevant lines in 25 files are covered.
• 9 unchanged lines in 4 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 96.188%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
satpy/dataset/dataid.py	78	80	97.5%
satpy/tests/test_dependency_tree.py	109	111	98.2%
satpy/dataset/id_keys.py	125	130	96.15%
satpy/dependency_tree.py	25	30	83.33%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
satpy/dependency_tree.py	1	95.77%
satpy/tests/utils.py	2	93.16%
satpy/tests/reader_tests/gms/test_gms5_vissr_l1b.py	3	98.67%
satpy/tests/reader_tests/gms/test_gms5_vissr_navigation.py	3	97.18%

Totals
Change from base Build 12299617024:	-0.02%
Covered Lines:	53294
Relevant Lines:	55406

---

💛 - Coveralls

[djhoese]

This is my main task remaining. I'm really not sure how I want to treat this. If you ask for a composite as DataQuery(name="some_comp", resolution=[500, 1000]), what do you set in the DataID? This is before we know what dependencies were found. So does the composite DataID become DataID(name="some_comp") with no resolution, resolution 500, or resolution 1000?