feat(cli): suppress stacktrace printing on configuration errors

[shirshanka]

Checklist

• The PR conforms to DataHub's Contributing Guideline (particularly Commit Message Format)
• Links to related issues (if applicable)
• Tests for the changes have been added/updated (if applicable)
• Docs related to the changes have been added/updated (if applicable). If a new feature has been added a Usage Guide has been added for the same.
• For any breaking change/potential downtime/deprecation/big changes an entry has been made in Updating DataHub

[hsheth2]

Code looks good - seems like there’s a minor formatting issue

[github-actions]

Unit Test Results (build & test)

  97 files  ±0    97 suites  ±0   21m 53s ⏱️ - 7m 6s
701 tests ±0  642 ✔️ ±0  59 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 77abffa. ± Comparison against base commit 788fb8f.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Unit Test Results (metadata ingestion)

       5 files         5 suites   59m 7s ⏱️
   434 tests    434 ✔️   0 💤 0 ❌
2 095 runs  2 049 ✔️ 46 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 77abffa.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[anshbansal]

Suppressing ValueError directly might cause issues with not having stacktraces. We are throwingValueError in pydantic validators as well as in other places outside pydantic validators.

Suggestion

• change all places inside pydantic validators to raise ConfigurationError instead of ValueError
• Do not suppress ValueError

[hsheth2]

@anshbansal I agree that we should remove ValueError from the suppressed list, but for a different reason.

pydantic validatiors must throw ValueError, TypeError, or AssertionError (see docs https://pydantic-docs.helpmanual.io/usage/validators/). However, pydantic itself will throw pydantic.ValidationError and so that's the error that we actually want to suppress.

Longer term, we need to switch all of our validators to throw ValueError instead of ConfigurationError, and then remove ConfigurationError from the suppressed list as well.