fix : Exclude unpublished courses from catalog content metadata API

[vshaikismail-sonata]

Root cause:-
The active status filtering was conditionally applied only when no [content_keys_filter] was provided. When specific content keys were requested, the filtering was skipped, allowing inactive courses to slip through.

Changes:-
-Removed the conditional check: Eliminated the if not content_keys_filter: block
to ensure filtering runs unconditionally.
-Unindented the filtering logic: Moved the queryset = [item for item in queryset if self.is_active(item)]
and related debug logging outside the conditional, so it's executed for all requests.
-Updated the comment: Changed to # Always filter out inactive courses to ensure only active content is always returned via API.

Tests:-
-Added unit tests to verify inactive courses are filtered out, and all the test cases were successful.
-Verified locally using mocked catalog content metadata.
-Mocking was used due to lack of real LMS data and was unable to create test courses after lot of trials.
-confirmed courses without active runs are excluded.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @vshaikismail-sonata!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/2u-enterprise.

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

🔘 Submit a signed contributor agreement (CLA)

⚠️ We ask all contributors to the Open edX project to submit a signed contributor agreement or indicate their institutional affiliation.
Please see the CONTRIBUTING file for more information.

If you've signed an agreement in the past, you may need to re-sign.
See The New Home of the Open edX Codebase for details.

Once you've signed the CLA, please allow 1 business day for it to be processed.
After this time, you can re-run the CLA check by adding a comment below that you have signed it.
If the CLA check continues to fail, you can tag the @openedx/cla-problems team in a comment for further assistance.

🔘 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.

[mphilbrick211]

Welcome, @vshaikismail-sonata, and thank you for this contribution! Please let me know if you have any questions regarding submitting a CLA form.

[e0d]

@vshaikismail-sonata I notice there are some commit-lint failures. Please note that we use conventional commits across Open edX projects. You can read about the details here. Can you please amend your commit messages to follow our standard?

[mphilbrick211]

@vshaikismail-sonata I notice there are some commit-lint failures. Please note that we use conventional commits across Open edX projects. You can read about the details here. Can you please amend your commit messages to follow our standard?

@vshaikismail-sonata your CLA is being processed, so the CLA check should turn green by later today.

[gshivajibiradar]

Reviewed the changes in the following files:
enterprise_catalog/apps/api/v1/tests/test_views.py
enterprise_catalog/apps/api/v1/views/enterprise_catalog_get_content_metadata.py

Tests

The test for excluding unpublished courses is added twice (test_excludes_unpublished_courses) with very similar logic. This appears to be a duplicate and one of them should be removed to avoid redundancy and potential confusion.

Apart from the duplication, the test logic itself correctly validates that unpublished courses are excluded from the API response.

View logic

The intent to always filter inactive courses is correct.

However, there are leftover merge conflict markers (<<<<<<<, =======, >>>>>>>) in enterprise_catalog_get_content_metadata.py that must be removed.

Additionally, the inactive-course filtering logic is currently applied twice (once conditionally and once unconditionally). The old conditional block should be cleaned up so the filtering is applied only once in a clear, consistent way.