fix: bump sqlparse to 0.5.0

[dpgaspar]

SUMMARY

Bumps sqlparse to 0.5.0 to address a potencial vulnerability.

Followup from: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/28042

Don't think we will have breaking changes here, I think that our upper bound was a cautions bound following semantic versioning for 0.X.X versions.

Changelog: https://github.com/andialbrecht/sqlparse/blob/master/CHANGELOG

Notable Changes

* Drop support for Python 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7.
* Python 3.12 is now supported (pr725, by hugovk).
* IMPORTANT: Fixes a potential denial of service attack (DOS) due to recursion
  error for deeply nested statements. Instead of recursion error a generic
  SQLParseError is raised. See the security advisory for details:
  https://github.com/andialbrecht/sqlparse/security/advisories/GHSA-2m57-hf25-phgg
  The vulnerability was discovered by @uriyay-jfrog. Thanks for reporting!

Enhancements:

* Splitting statements now allows to remove the semicolon at the end.
  Some database backends love statements without semicolon (issue742).
* Support TypedLiterals in get_parameters (pr649, by Khrol).
* Improve splitting of Transact SQL when using GO keyword (issue762).
* Support for some JSON operators (issue682).
* Improve formatting of statements containing JSON operators (issue542).
* Support for BigQuery and Snowflake keywords (pr699, by griffatrasgo).
* Support parsing of OVER clause (issue701, pr768 by r33s3n6).

Bug Fixes

* Ignore dunder attributes when creating Tokens (issue672).
* Allow operators to precede dollar-quoted strings (issue763).
* Fix parsing of nested order clauses (issue745, pr746 by john-bodley).
* Thread-safe initialization of Lexer class (issue730).
* Classify TRUNCATE as DDL and GRANT/REVOKE as DCL keywords (based on pr719
  by josuc1, thanks for bringing this up!).
* Fix parsing of PRIMARY KEY (issue740).

BEFORE/AFTER SCREENSHOTS OR ANIMATED GIF

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• [ ] Has associated issue:
• [ ] Required feature flags:
• [ ] Changes UI
• [ ] Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
  • [ ] Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
  • [ ] Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
  • [ ] Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
• [ ] Introduces new feature or API
• [ ] Removes existing feature or API

[john-bodley]

@dpgaspar and @betodealmeida is the plan sitll—per [SIP-117] Improve SQL parsing —to remove sqlparse completely?

[betodealmeida]

@dpgaspar and @betodealmeida is the plan sitll—per [SIP-117] Improve SQL parsing —to remove sqlparse completely?

Yes, I'm still working on it. Had to put aside to work on catalogs (SIP-95), but I'm going to finish the work on SIP-117 soon.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 83.40%. Comparing base (76d897e) to head (fe92963). Report is 112 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #28144       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   60.48%   83.40%   +22.92%     
===========================================
  Files        1931      521     -1410     
  Lines       76236    37467    -38769     
  Branches     8568        0     -8568     
===========================================
- Hits        46114    31251    -14863     
+ Misses      28017     6216    -21801     
+ Partials     2105        0     -2105     

Flag	Coverage Δ
hive	49.09% <ø> (-0.07%)	:arrow_down:
javascript	?
mysql	77.12% <ø> (?)
postgres	77.23% <ø> (?)
presto	53.65% <ø> (-0.15%)	:arrow_down:
python	83.40% <ø> (+19.92%)	:arrow_up:
sqlite	76.68% <ø> (?)
unit	58.81% <ø> (+1.19%)	:arrow_up:

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

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[denodo-research-labs]

CVE-2024-4340 is reported as HIGH by some security tools like PRISMA.

Will this version bump be applied to the 3.1-x branch too to avoid that CVE affecting current stable versions?