Frontend base Migration

[jesusbalderramawgu]

Description

PR to migrate this repository to frontend base. It closes this issue.
Turning the MFE into a library that runs inside the
frontend-base shell. Follows the official "Migrating an MFE to frontend-base" guide.

How I have tested this change?

• Ran unit tests
• Built the project
• Ran the project locally and tested manually the different views

Screenshots

Closes #211

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @jesusbalderramawgu!

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.

[bradenmacdonald]

What changed these ; to , ? Semicolons are the standard for TypeScript interfaces and most code formatters and linters enforce that. Restoring these to ; is not only more correct but will make this diff smaller.

[jesusbalderramawgu]

I changed this because the linter was complaining about the ; and I checked the instructor dashboard and it has commas as well.
This is an example of the instructor dashboard.

[bradenmacdonald]

Hmm, @arbrandes do you if it was a deliberate decision to change the eslint config in frontend-base so that member-delimiter-style requires commas instead of the default semicolons?

It's not a big deal, but it seems like it's making all our "convert to frontend-base" diffs noisy, and goes against the usual standard in the TypeScript world.

[arbrandes]

Yeah, I've run into this in the past, and found it annoying. I don't remember ever discussing this with David, though, so don't actually know why.

But at the same time it feels weird to go back to all the frontend-base repos to change it back. Ug.

[bradenmacdonald]

IMHO that's why we should actually use the "warnings vs. errors" feature that linters (eslint & oxlint) have. We could mark the comma as a warning, the semicolon as correct, and then never worry about it again. This diff would be smaller, and the existing frontend-base codebases would be fine, and could be slowly brought into alignment.

But we have a configuration that basically treats warnings as errors, so we don't really take advantage of that.

[bradenmacdonald]

I think this boilerplate should be factored out into a common testUtils file. It's very verbose to have it repeated so many times in each test suite. The way we do it via testUtils in the authoring MFE has been nice.

    beforeEach(() => {
      initializeMockApp({
        authenticatedUser: {
          userId: 1,
          username: 'testuser',
          email: 'testuser@example.com',
          name: 'Test User',
          administrator: false,
          roles: [],
          avatar: '',
        },
      });

[jesusbalderramawgu]

agree! I will refactor this, thanks