Refactoring DataObjects

[PaulTalbot-INL]

---

Issue Description

The DataObjects, while very useful up to this point, have a few shortcomings that need addressing.

1. They rely on internal data containers, so we maintain them ourselves. Many great python libraries exist that do this same kind of work.

2. They are limited to our current PointSet and HistorySet implementations. We have had calls already for high-dimensional field data, which is outside our grasp.

3. The API between other entities in RAVEN and the DataObjects has become muddied by needs unexpected by the original design. This API should be updated and clarified for our foreseable needs.

---

For Change Control Board: Issue Review

This review should occur before any development is performed as a response to this issue.

• 1. Is it tagged with a type: defect or improvement?
• 2. Is it tagged with a priority: critical, normal or minor?
• 3. If it will impact requirements or requirements tests, is it tagged with requirements?
• 4. If it is a defect, can it cause wrong results for users? If so an email needs to be sent to the users.
• 5. Is a rationale provided? (Such as explaining why the improvement is needed or why current code is wrong.)

---

For Change Control Board: Issue Closure

This review should occur when the issue is imminently going to be closed.

• 1. If the issue is a defect, is the defect fixed?
• 2. If the issue is a defect, is the defect tested for in the regression test system? (If not explain why not.)
• 3. If the issue can impact users, has an email to the users group been written (the email should specify if the defect impacts stable or master)?
• 4. If the issue is a defect, does it impact the latest stable branch? If yes, is there any issue tagged with stable (create if needed)?
• 5. If the issue is being closed without a merge request, has an explanation of why it is being closed been provided?