IBM Db2 provider: skip None-valued extra parameters to avoid KEY=None in connection strings

[ShubhamKapoor992]

Description

Skip None-valued extra parameters when building Db2 connection strings and URIs

When extra connection parameters contain keys with None values (e.g. from a partially-filled connection form), the previous code would emit them as the literal string "None" in the Db2 connection string (KEY=None;) and in the SQLAlchemy URI query string (?KEY=None). Both cases result in either a connection error or silently passing a bad value to the driver.

This fix skips None-valued keys in both get_conn() (connection string builder) and get_uri() (SQLAlchemy URI builder), so only explicitly configured parameters reach the Db2 driver.

---

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

• Yes (please specify the tool below)

---

• Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information. Note: commit author/co-author name and email in commits become permanently public when merged.
• For fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
• When adding dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
• For significant user-facing changes create newsfragment: {pr_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments. You can add this file in a follow-up commit after the PR is created so you know the PR number.

Note: The change is small and self-contained and the provider isn't released nor used so I have not created the Git Issue.

[boring-cyborg]

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache Airflow community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contributors' Guide
Here are some useful points:

• Pay attention to the quality of your code (ruff, mypy and type annotations). Our prek-hooks will help you with that.
• In case of a new feature add useful documentation (in docstrings or in docs/ directory). Adding a new operator? Check this short guide Consider adding an example Dag that shows how users should use it.
• Consider using Breeze environment for testing locally, it's a heavy docker but it ships with a working Airflow and a lot of integrations.
• Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from Committers.
• Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Mailing list and Slack.
• Be sure to read the Airflow Coding style.
• Always keep your Pull Requests rebased, otherwise your build might fail due to changes not related to your commits.
  Apache Airflow is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
  In case of doubts contact the developers at:
  Mailing List: dev@airflow.apache.org
  Slack: https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack

[ColtenOuO]

Thanks for the fix -- skipping None-valued extras in get_conn()/get_uri() looks correct and avoids emitting KEY=None to the Db2 driver.

I think there have a few things before this is ready to merge:

1. The PR title should clearly describe the specific changes rather than just mentioning which provider were modified.
2. I think we need to add a test to prevent the same issue from happening again in the future.
3. To keep the branch clean, we should rebase onto main instead of merging.
4. Similar to the PR title, commit messages should explain the reasoning and the solution behind the changes in detail, so that future contributors touching similar files can quickly understand the context.

[ShubhamKapoor992]

Thanks for the fix -- skipping None-valued extras in get_conn()/get_uri() looks correct and avoids emitting KEY=None to the Db2 driver.

I think there have a few things before this is ready to merge:

1. The PR title should clearly describe the specific changes rather than just mentioning which provider were modified.
2. I think we need to add a test to prevent the same issue from happening again in the future.
3. To keep the branch clean, we should rebase onto main instead of merging.
4. Similar to the PR title, commit messages should explain the reasoning and the solution behind the changes in detail, so that future contributors touching similar files can quickly understand the context.

Thanks for the review. Did the changes you suggested. Could you please review it again.

[ColtenOuO]

LGTM, Thanks! Let's wait for the Commiter or PMC member take a more look.

[boring-cyborg]

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request! You are invited to check our Issue Tracker for additional contributions.