refactor(api): Rename opentrons.commands to opentrons.legacy_commands

[SyntaxColoring]

Overview

My editor search keeps wanting to open opentrons.commands, which is old and vibeless and misleading. The actual commands that most of us need to care about are in opentrons.protocol_engine.commands.

Test Plan

• I've looked for public-facing mentions of opentrons.commands in the Python Protocol API and could only find one, which looks safe to change.

Review requests

Is this a good idea?

Risk assessment

Low.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.19%. Comparing base (cf93d9c) to head (a3d1f43).
Report is 16 commits behind head on edge.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             edge   #14796      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.19%   67.19%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        2495     2495              
  Lines       71388    71380       -8     
  Branches     8984     8984              
==========================================
- Hits        47972    47964       -8     
  Misses      21301    21301              
  Partials     2115     2115              

Flag	Coverage Δ
g-code-testing	92.43% <ø> (ø)

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

Files	Coverage Δ
api/src/opentrons/execute.py	54.23% <ø> (ø)
...i/src/opentrons/protocol_api/instrument_context.py	88.99% <ø> (-0.11%)	⬇️
api/src/opentrons/protocol_api/module_contexts.py	88.01% <ø> (-0.11%)	⬇️
api/src/opentrons/protocol_api/protocol_context.py	92.74% <ø> (ø)
...c/opentrons/protocol_engine/clients/sync_client.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...opentrons/protocol_runner/legacy_command_mapper.py	98.21% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
...opentrons/protocol_runner/legacy_context_plugin.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
api/src/opentrons/protocols/duration/estimator.py	60.50% <ø> (-0.13%)	⬇️
api/src/opentrons/simulate.py	57.29% <ø> (-0.45%)	⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

[DerekMaggio]

I think it is a good idea. But I am biased because this exact thing was annoying me beyond belief yesterday.
Oooooh maybe add a deprecation note with Seth's fancy new Note stuff?

[sfoster1]

📳 📈

[SyntaxColoring]

Oooooh maybe add a deprecation note with Seth's fancy new Note stuff?

Interesting—like if a protocol tries to import opentrons.commands, add a warning note somewhere on the run?

I think that's a good idea and something that the system should be able to support. For prioritization reasons, I don't think I'm going to pursue it right now, but I'll keep that use-case in mind as we build out the notes system.