[ENH] Implemented pipeline_version and pipeline_name query fields

[rmanaem]

• Closes Allow querying for pipeline name and version #341

Checklist

This section is for the PR reviewer

• PR has an interpretable title with a prefix ([ENH], [FIX], [REF], [TST], [CI], [MNT], [INF], [MODEL], [DOC]) (see our Contributing Guidelines for more info)
• PR has a label for the release changelog or skip-release (to be applied by maintainers only)
• PR links to GitHub issue with mention Closes #XXXX
• Tests pass
• Checks pass

For new features:

• Tests have been added

For bug fixes:

• There is at least one test that would fail under the original bug conditions.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11260361393

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 40 of 47 (85.11%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.7%) to 95.385%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
app/api/utility.py	4	6	66.67%
app/api/crud.py	1	6	16.67%

Totals
Change from base Build 11127997371:	-0.7%
Covered Lines:	744
Relevant Lines:	780

---

💛 - Coveralls

[alyssadai]

Thanks a lot for the PR @rmanaem!

The new query params look good overall, though I realized during my review that some aspects of the desired query response might still need clarifying, which I tried to do in my comments.

This made me think: maybe we can have a chat about how to ensure we're all on the same page regarding new neuroimaging data properties, as I understand some of this is domain-specific, and possibly hard to intuit. Maybe during the issue spec stage, we can look at more examples of possible forms the input (e.g., derived) metadata can take, and write up a mock example response (which I think we've done a couple times when changing the data model?)

Let me know if you need more clarification on any of the points below!

[alyssadai]

Looks good @rmanaem! I left one sanity check question for myself, and a few 🍒

Have a look, and then 🧑‍🍳

[neurobagel-bot]

🚀 PR was released in v0.4.0 🚀