Transfer refactor for future reusability improvements

[jirhiker]

Why

This PR addresses the following problem / context:

• Use bullet points here

How

Implementation summary - the following was changed / added / removed:

• Use bullet points here

Notes

Any special considerations, workarounds, or follow-up work to note?

• Use bullet points here

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 70.88123% with 152 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
transfers/util.py	19.63%	131 Missing ⚠️
services/util.py	47.36%	10 Missing ⚠️
schemas/thing.py	87.50%	7 Missing ⚠️
db/thing.py	91.66%	3 Missing ⚠️
db/permission_history.py	95.83%	1 Missing ⚠️

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
core/enums.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
db/__init__.py	98.03% <100.00%> (+0.36%)	⬆️
db/aquifer_system.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
db/aquifer_type.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
db/contact.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
db/data_provenance.py	93.33% <100.00%> (ø)
db/geologic_formation.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
db/location.py	88.63% <100.00%> (-6.37%)	⬇️
db/notes.py	95.23% <ø> (ø)
db/status_history.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 13 more

... and 21 files with indirect coverage changes

[jacob-a-brown]

I think it looks good! And I like the movement to class-based transfers. With a large PR it can be difficult to be sure I gave everything its due in a review, but if we run into something in the future we can always open a fix PR