refactor: adding namespace to permissions

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Description

Updating namespaces to permissions to use name spaced identifiers by adding the content_libraries prefix.
Example:
Before: delete_library
After content_libraries.delete_library

The permissions used/mocked on the unit tests were also modified to keep consistency.
Closes #35
Related to: openedx/openedx-authz#136

Also had to add ts-jest as devDependency to fix broken test workflow:

Run npm run test

> @openedx/[email protected] test
> fedx-scripts jest --coverage --passWithNoTests

Running with resolved config:
/home/runner/work/frontend-app-admin-console/frontend-app-admin-console/jest.config.js

● Validation Error:

  Module ts-jest in the transform option was not found.
         <rootDir> is: /home/runner/work/frontend-app-admin-console/frontend-app-admin-console

  Configuration Documentation:
  https://jestjs.io/docs/configuration

Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

Important

Dependency

openedx/openedx-authz#142

How to test it

Make sure you are running openedx-authz v0.16.0

• Clone this branch
• npm install && npm run dev
• Verify the roles and permission tabs display correct information

Screenshots of the Roles and Permission tabs

Before	After

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @jacobo-dominguez-wgu!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/committers-frontend.

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.

Details

---

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

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.34%. Comparing base (b760584) to head (99a691e).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #37   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.33%   94.34%           
=======================================
  Files          44       44           
  Lines         883      884    +1     
  Branches      155      155           
=======================================
+ Hits          833      834    +1     
  Misses         48       48           
  Partials        2        2           

☔ 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.

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Does it need to be backported to release/ulmo?

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Does it need to be backported to release/ulmo?

Here is the backported pr #38

[MaferMazu]

Suggested change

	{ key: 'content_libraries.edit_library', label: 'edit', resource: 'library' },
	{ key: 'content_libraries.edit_library_content', label: 'edit', resource: 'library' },

[MaferMazu]

I think it would be better to define those permission strings as variables and use them to avoid misspellings or manual errors. In the long term, it should be valuable to extract those permissions to ensure consistency between the front and the back.

(Not a blocker)

[MaferMazu]

The rest looks good to me. Thanks.

[arbrandes]

Has this been addressed?

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Added const variables for the library permissions.

[mariajgrimaldi]

I tested this locally and it's working as expected! Thank you so much for moving this forward :)

[arbrandes]

Looks good but the mock data in one of the tests is incorrect/misleading, as per @MaferMazu's comment.

[arbrandes]

Has this been addressed?

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Created const variables for the library permissions and updated all the references.
Also fix a race condition on a unit test that was sometimes failing and sometimes passing, used an act to fix it.

[arbrandes]

Thanks!