Null safety

[timothysteward-wk]

Motivation

This PR migrates the repo to enable null safety.

Changes

Release Notes

Review

See CONTRIBUTING.md for more details on review types (+1 / QA +1 / +10) and code review process.

Please review:

QA Checklist

• Tests were updated and provide good coverage of the changeset and other affected code
• Manual testing was performed if needed
  • Steps from PR author:
  • Anything falling under manual testing criteria outlined in CONTRIBUTING.md

Merge Checklist

While we perform many automated checks before auto-merging, some manual checks are needed:

• A Frontend Architecture member has reviewed these changes
• There are no unaddressed comments - this check can be automated if reviewers use the "Request Changes" feature
• For release PRs - Version metadata in Rosie comment is correct

[aviary-wf]

Security Insights

No security relevant content was detected by automated scans.

Action Items

• Review PR for security impact; comment "security review required" if needed or unsure
• Verify aviary.yaml coverage of security relevant code

---

Questions or Comments? Reach out on Slack: #support-infosec.

[evanweible-wf]

Could we make this late instead of nullable to avoid all the !s below?

[timothysteward-wk]

I thought about that, but we explicitly make it null in the tear down. It seems like we should this so we don't get weird behavior with the client sticking around if we forget to set it in one of the tests.

[evanweible-wf]

Makes me sort of wish tests were class-based so that you didn't have to deal with scoping that exists beyond the test's lifecycle.

[timothysteward-wk]

Consumer test PRs:
https://github.com/Workiva/doc_plat_client/pull/40281
https://github.com/Workiva/wdesk/pull/45626
https://github.com/Workiva/graph_app/pull/54816
Workiva/w_transport#392

[robbecker-wf]

QA+1 CI passes and manual consumer tests pass

[robbecker-wf]

@Workiva/release-management-p

[rmconsole-wf]

+1 from RM