feat: Add Sidebar for course outline [FC-0114]

[navinkarkera]

Closed in favor of #2778

Description

Add flow in course outline sidebar. Allows author to add new section/subsection/unit or any container from existing libraries via sidebar.
NOTE: The containers can only be added to the last parent block in this flow.

Useful information to include:

• Which user roles will this change impact? "Course Author"

Screenshots

Supporting information

• Course Outline: Add Sidebar basics (Add button Flow) #2629
• Private-ref: https://tasks.opencraft.com/browse/FAL-4295
• Built on top of feat: course outline sidebar #2731

Testing instructions

• Add different types of containers using this new sidebar.
• Verify behaviour of filters except for the All libraries filter. It is a dummy and will be implemented in a separate PR as part of Course Outline: Filter by Library (Add Sidebar) #2633
• Only review the commits that are not part of feat: course outline sidebar #2731

Other information

Include anything else that will help reviewers and consumers understand the change.

• Does this change depend on other changes elsewhere?
• Any special concerns or limitations? For example: deprecations, migrations, security, or accessibility.

Best Practices Checklist

We're trying to move away from some deprecated patterns in this codebase. Please
check if your PR meets these recommendations before asking for a review:

• Any new files are using TypeScript (.ts, .tsx).
• Avoid propTypes and defaultProps in any new or modified code.
• Tests should use the helpers in src/testUtils.tsx (specifically initializeMocks)
• Do not add new fields to the Redux state/store. Use React Context to share state among multiple components.
• Use React Query to load data from REST APIs. See any apiHooks.ts in this repo for examples.
• All new i18n messages in messages.ts files have a description for translators to use.
• Avoid using ../ in import paths. To import from parent folders, use @src, e.g. import { initializeMocks } from '@src/testUtils'; instead of from '../../../../testUtils'

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @navinkarkera!

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

• If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
  • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
• If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

• Dependencies

  This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

• Blockers

  This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

• Timeline information

  This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

• Partner information

  This is for a course on edx.org.

• Supporting documentation
• Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

🔘 Update the status of your PR

Your PR is currently marked as a draft. After completing the steps above, update its status by clicking "Ready for Review", or removing "WIP" from the title, as appropriate.

---

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

• Overview of Review Process for Community Contributions
• Pull Request Status Guide
• Making changes to your pull request

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

• The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
• The need for product review
• Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.00631% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.01%. Comparing base (2209242) to head (9e915d2).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/CourseAuthoringContext.tsx	86.66%	6 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/outline-sidebar/AddSidebar.tsx	95.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...brary-authoring/library-filters/SidebarFilters.tsx	76.47%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/utils.tsx	81.81%	2 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/LibraryAuthoringPage.tsx	94.73%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ary-authoring/collections/CollectionInfoHeader.tsx	80.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/data/apiHooks.ts	92.85%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2775      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.99%   95.01%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1256     1260       +4     
  Lines       28800    28949     +149     
  Branches     6538     6606      +68     
==========================================
+ Hits        27358    27507     +149     
+ Misses       1384     1372      -12     
- Partials       58       70      +12     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[rpenido]

LGTM 👍
Thank you for your work, @navinkarkera!

• I tested this using the instructions from the PR
• I read through the code
• I checked for accessibility issues
• Includes documentation]

Great work on the refactor.
I was not super thrilled with the useLibraryContext(false), but as you said, we could refactor that later. Maybe splitting the context?

[rpenido]

Do we still need this? Wasn't the studio unit outline deprecated?

[navinkarkera]

@rpenido Did not change the actual implementation, just moved it into the context.

[navinkarkera]

I was not super thrilled with the useLibraryContext(false), but as you said, we could refactor that later. Maybe splitting the context?

Me too, but there is no clean way without requiring a lot of refactoring. I thought about splitting the context but even that would not be helpful as most of the components should work in both cases i.e., inside and outside a single library context.

[bradenmacdonald]

I think we should not change the LibraryContext to support multiple libraryIds. It makes things too messy. The context is already storing too much data and needs to be simplified, and this makes it even more complex.

Instead, if you really have a page where you need to render content from multiple libraries, wrap each individual component in its own <LibraryContextProvider> for just one library. You can even nest them if you ever need to have a component from a second library displayed inside a main library.

But, to render this sort of view (in mockup below), no LibraryContext should be required at all! All the relevant data comes from Meilisearch, and the <ComponentCard>/<BaseCard> etc. should not depend on a library context. (I think right now it's used for showOnlyPublished but that should be moved to ComponentPickerContext instead of LibraryContext.)

[navinkarkera]

Makes sense. I have updated #2778 to create new contexts for showOnlyPublished and multiple library case.

[bradenmacdonald]

Looks much cleaner to me in the new PR. Thanks!

[navinkarkera]

@rpenido @ChrisChV @bradenmacdonald I am closing this in favor of #2778 as it is much easier to refactor context related code in that PR which contains both Add Sidebar and Library filter together and it also helps avoid conflicts.