Difficult to find users to delete from group in large groups

[iam-vir-harshit]

References

• Fixes Difficult to find users to delete from group in large groups #2869
• Requires Backend PR: Difficult to find users to delete from group in large groups DSpace#9793

Description -

• The list of current members on the edit group page is searchable now;
• Edit EPerson page allows (admins) to delete person from groups it is a member of without having to go to that
  group page.

List of changes in this PR:

1. For searching the current editing group members (includes frontend and backend task) :-
   a) - In the Frontend, we have added a search form;
   b) - In the Backend, we have added a search method("findIsMemberOf") that receives current editing group id and query parameter which
   searches in the current member's list of the editing group;

2. For deleting the eperson from groups (includes only frontend task) :-
   a) - We have only added an extra column in the edit eperson page for giving remove button;
   b) - We are utilizing the same api created for unlinking an eperson from the group in the edit group page;

Steps to reproduce:-

Task 1- Search option in the group edit page (in current epeople members section)

1. Login as admin user
2. Go to Access Control option in the side pannel
3. Then go to Groups section in the Access Control
4. Then choose a group to edit and enter into the edit group screen
5. In the current members of EPeople section, now you will get a search option to search a member

Task 2- Remove button in the particular EPeople edit page

1. Login as admin user
2. Go to Access Control option in the side pannel
3. Then go to People section in the Access Control
4. Then choose a epeople to edit and enter into the edit epeople screen
5. At the bottom, in the "Member of these groups" section, now you will find remove button corresponding to each group

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[iam-vir-harshit]

Rebased with dspace-angular main branch

[tdonohue]

@iam-vir-harshit : Thanks also for this PR! Apologies for the delay in reviewing this, but we gave this a code review as a team in today's Developer Meeting. Overall, the code looks good, but again we are noticing that automated tests are missing:

• The changes to eperson-form.component.ts should all be tested in eperson-form.component.spec.ts
• Similarly, the changes to members-list.component.ts should all have automated tests in members-list.component.spec.ts.

Once those automated tests are added, the Codecov warnings on this PR (in the "Files changed" tab) should go away (or mostly go away). We can then work to get this tested and merged quickly. Thanks again!

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[tdonohue]

@iam-vir-harshit : Just a friendly reminder, that if you want this PR to be considered for the 9.0 release, we will need to have the feedback above resolved soon (and any merge conflicts resolved). Our 9.0 feature merger deadline is March 28. Anything not approved & merged by that date will unfortunately need to be delayed for the next major release.

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[PitbaranK]

Hi @tdonohue,
We have incorporated all the feedbacks against code review provided by you. Can you please update on the same?

@MarieVerdonck,
Can you please review the changes against #2869 and let us know will it fulfil the requirements?

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[tdonohue]

@iam-vir-harshit : This PR has a merge conflict because it looks like you've updated every *.json5 translation file in this PR. That's usually not the best practice because it will result in this PR having a merge conflict nearly every time someone adds new translations.

Instead, we recommend only updating the en.json5 file when adding new i18n keys. If you wanted to translate those keys immediately you could update them in one or two other *.json5 files. But, we have a process where we "re-sync" all other *.json5 files, so it's not necessary for you to do that re-sync in this PR...as it will make it more difficult for you to keep this PR free of merge conflicts.

[iam-vir-harshit]

Reopening this PR with the recommended *.json5 translation file changes rollback except the en.json5 changes.

[iam-vir-harshit]

@tdonohue,
As we can see, there are test case failures in run tests (18.x) are not related to our changes. Can you please re run the same from your side once?

[github-actions]

Hi @iam-vir-harshit,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[tdonohue]

@iam-vir-harshit : Apologies that we have not gotten a reviewer on this PR yet. However, we are just beginning a more detailed review process for 10.0 for all new feature PRs. If you can rebase this on latest main that would allow us to consider this for 10.0. Thanks!