feat: library dropdown filter in add sidebar

[navinkarkera]

Description

In addition to changes in #2775 (comment), this PR adds following:

Adds library dropdown filter in add sidebar. Allows authors to filter containers by selected libraries.

Useful information to include:

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

Screenshots

Supporting information

• Course Outline: Filter by Library (Add Sidebar) #2633
• Private-ref: https://tasks.opencraft.com/browse/FAL-4298
• Built on top of feat: Add Sidebar for course outline [FC-0114] #2775

Testing instructions

• Use the new library dropdown filter in add sidebar.
• Verify the containers are being filtered.
• Verify the label changes based on number of libraries selected.

Other information

• Requirement not clear for collections filter.

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 96.47303% with 17 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.04%. Comparing base (4787490) to head (ccba44a).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/CourseAuthoringContext.tsx	86.66%	6 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/outline-sidebar/AddSidebar.tsx	95.06%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/utils.tsx	81.81%	2 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/LibraryAuthoringPage.tsx	96.29%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ary-authoring/collections/CollectionInfoHeader.tsx	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ry-authoring/collections/LibraryCollectionPage.tsx	90.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/data/api.ts	87.50%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/data/apiHooks.ts	94.11%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2778      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.99%   95.04%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files        1256     1263       +7     
  Lines       28800    29047     +247     
  Branches     6337     6626     +289     
==========================================
+ Hits        27358    27607     +249     
+ Misses       1384     1370      -14     
- 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

[rpenido]

Out of curiosity: why do we need this timeout here?

[navinkarkera]

@rpenido We delay request to backend by 500ms everytime user types something to avoid sending request on each character change by using debounce here. So we need to wait for atleast 500ms in the tests.

[bradenmacdonald]

Thanks for those changes!