ui: allow actions for other users of root admin

[shwstppr]

Description

Fixes #10306

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• build/CI
• test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[sureshanaparti]

@blueorangutan ui

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 18.17%. Comparing base (cca8b2f) to head (601b07d).
⚠️ Report is 513 commits behind head on 4.22.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.22   #11319      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     16.99%   18.17%   +1.17%     
- Complexity    14715    16188    +1473     
============================================
  Files          5832     5886      +54     
  Lines        517561   559082   +41521     
  Branches      62982    77610   +14628     
============================================
+ Hits          87975   101616   +13641     
- Misses       419651   446419   +26768     
- Partials       9935    11047    +1112     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.42% <ø> (+0.59%)	⬆️
unittests	19.22% <ø> (+1.27%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

[blueorangutan]

@shwstppr a Jenkins job has been kicked to build UI QA env. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

UI build: ✔️
Live QA URL: https://qa.cloudstack.cloud/simulator/pr/11319 (QA-JID-697)

[shwstppr]

@blueorangutan ui

[blueorangutan]

@shwstppr a Jenkins job has been kicked to build UI QA env. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

UI build: ✔️
Live QA URL: https://qa.cloudstack.cloud/simulator/pr/11319 (QA-JID-698)

[harikrishna-patnala]

LGTM

tested with multiple admin accounts and with different admin role types.

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm, but except for record.id !== store.userInfo.id the code is identical in three places. Maybe create a validation method?

EDIT: another difference spotted in the first compared to the other two places, but the remark holds.

[rajujith]

@shwstppr Since this is for the 4.22.1 release, could you retarget the PR to the 4.22 branch?

[shwstppr]

@blueorangutan ui

[blueorangutan]

@shwstppr a Jenkins job has been kicked to build UI QA env. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

UI build: ✔️
Live QA URL: https://qa.cloudstack.cloud/simulator/pr/11319 (QA-JID-842)

[RosiKyu]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@RosiKyu a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16562

[RosiKyu]

LGTM

Root Admin can now manage other Root Admin users while self-protection and Domain Admin restrictions work as expected.

#	Test Case	Result
TC1	Root Admin can manage other Root Admin users	PASS
TC2	Root Admin cannot disable/delete themselves	PASS
TC3	Domain Admin cannot manage Root Admin users	PASS
TC4	Domain Admin can manage regular users	PASS
TC5	Project Admin users (accounttype=4) protection	PASS
TC6	Default admin account protection	PASS