Add "platform" to "context" schema, *IF* there's consensus

[ruck94301]

Background
In LabGym 2.9.6, the LabGym start sends a msg to a central logging
receiver (implemented on Google Cloud Platform).
(that is, unless disabled by config or by command-line arg)

The 2.9.6 uses a data schema that we call 'context 2025-08-10',

which results in received json files looking like this:

    {
      "received": "2025-09-02T144227-0400",
      "data": {
        "schema": "context 2025-08-10",
        "python_version": "3.10.11",
        "version": "2.9.6"
        }
    }

and lets us report like

  17 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.3 with Python 3.10.18
   5 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.5 with Python 3.10.11
  11 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.0
 358 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.11
   7 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.12
   1 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.14
  16 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.16
  73 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.18
   1 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.4
   6 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.8
   5 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.10.9
  20 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.9.13
  10 2025-09    User started LabGym 2.9.6 with Python 3.9.23

Before August symposium, there was a concern about keeping the context
schema clean of "identifying" info, and so "platform" was removed.
Symposium was fast approaching, so it made sense to remove, instead of
prolong with debate.

But I still think "platform" is useful, and not identifying, so I'd like
to re-add it (and update the schema name since schema is changed).
Then we'll have info re os and hardware.
Thoughts?

On my mac, platform.platform() returns
'macOS-12.7.6-x86_64-i386-64bit'

[yujiahu415]

Obtaining user information is a double-sided sword. It may help us to provide better user support. It may also make users feel unsafe. Before we figure out why this information is useful and how to appropriately use it, we'll not implement this.

[ruck94301]

This isn't user-identifiable information.

The use for the platform.platform() info is the same as the use for the Python version.
It lets the developers assess in the future, perhaps yearly, and answer the questions like,

• "Do we still want to support Intel-based Mac?"
• "Do we still want to support Python 3.9?"
• "We haven't seen hw/operating-system X being used for N months, so let's stop trying so hard to maintain compatibility for a scenario that no longer is relevant." It lets us off the hook for the extra defensive coding and testing and documentation.

[yujiahu415]

Thank you for the clarification. As long as it's not a user-identifiable information, it's generally fine. However, it's still not clear to me how we can use this information to provide better user support. There might be users who don't want to register but just want to use LabGym, and their OS info will not be obtained. Therefore, we cannot make a decision whether to stop support for an OS on the information we have obtained since it might not be representative.

In addition, LabGym is, at least for now, Python 3 dependent. Whether a specific version of Python3 is compatible with a specific version of OS is not determined by us, and we can get such info from somewhere (like some online forums) other than user source, right?