Small fixes before the release

[Bachibouzouk]

• fix the conversion from .py to .xlsx
• fix the link to contribution.html
• fix test_run.py
• fix unexpected warning on appliances with duty cycles

[Bachibouzouk]

Contributing.html is browsable locally with the docs but somehow not online, I need to have a closer look at it, somehow commiting the .md file did not solve the issue

[FLomb]

Hi,

I've pushed a commit that fixes the path issues in test_run.py, as long as the file is run from the root folder, as indicated in our contributing guidelines. So that's done. I've also introduced a random_seed=True parameter, which may be matched with reference outputs also generated via random seed in future upgrades of the code.

Nonetheless, in implementing such a fix, I bumped into other small issues. Namely, I get the following warning for all three input files:
The app has duty cycle option on, however the switch on event fell outside the provided duty cycle windows

The warning poses 2 issues:

1. The warning string does not work as expected, because it's supposed to provide the appliance name (in the code, the string is: f"The app {self.name} has duty cycle...) and it does not do so;
2. The warning should not be there in the first place, I suppose. So this warning is either triggered unnecessarily, or something is wrong in the input files (which I doubt).

[Bachibouzouk]

1. The warning string does not work as expected, because it's supposed to provide the appliance name (in the code, the string is: f"The app {self.name} has duty cycle...) and it does not do so;

The app name seem to be "", now I added a default name when an appliance gets added to a user in #153 (specifically 522b436)

[Bachibouzouk]

2. The warning should not be there in the first place, I suppose. So this warning is either triggered unnecessarily, or something is wrong in the input files (which I doubt).

I found the following comment in the code

                    # TODO previously duty_cycle3 was always considered as default if the evaluate proxy did neither
                    #  get selected by duty_cycle1 nor duty_cycle2, for default is kept but not silently anymore in
                    #  order to see whether this is an issue or not
``

[Bachibouzouk]

2. The warning should not be there in the first place, I suppose. So this warning is either triggered unnecessarily, or something is wrong in the input files (which I doubt).

@FLomb - the warning was actually showing some odd behavior which was swept under the rug before, see #153 (it does not modify tremenduously the example profiles, fortunately :))

[FLomb]

I tested extensively the PR locally, and all seems to work very smoothly. I am happy to approve it. Thanks, @Bachibouzouk !