Add test for source names with quotes

[gshank]

Resolves #10582

Problem

We did not have tests for source names with characters requiring escaping in json.

Solution

Create a test case.

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.84%. Comparing base (5f66678) to head (95c7f01).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10588      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.93%   88.84%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         180      180              
  Lines       22735    22755      +20     
==========================================
- Hits        20220    20217       -3     
- Misses       2515     2538      +23     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	86.08% <ø> (-0.17%)	⬇️
unit	62.34% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️

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

Components	Coverage Δ
Unit Tests	62.34% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️
Integration Tests	86.08% <ø> (-0.17%)	⬇️

[QMalcolm]

Looks good to me! Some thoughts, but non blocking.

1. Do we need a changelog for test only changes? I've typically avoiding changelog additions for test only additions because the tests aren't actually included in the released package. I'm not sure what the right approach is, but the fact that we approach it differently means that it might be worth talking about.

2. I'd be interetested to see if we could do this as a unit test. I guess the question there is "can a test that writes the file system be a unit test?"

[gshank]

I wasn't sure about the changelog either. We probably should have a policy discussion on that.

I thought about a unit test, but we want to test writing the artifact and the way that's done makes for a kind of tricky unit test setup, where it's hard to be really confident that you're testing what you want to be testing.