Adding permission validations from authz for Course Updates

[jacobo-dominguez-wgu]

Description

This pr add the permission validations for the Course Updates section on the Content menu from the header.
First this validates the enableAuthzCourseAuthoring waffle flag and if it is enabled it checks the permissions from authz over the course updates section.
These are the checks included:

• Checks for the courses.view_course_updates permission to display or hide the Course Updates option on the header menu.
• Checks for courses.manage_course_updates to display or hide the "+ New update" button and the edit and remove icon buttons for the available course updates and course handouts.

Resolves #2932

Supporting information

Depends on backend ticket openedx/openedx-authz#191

Testing instructions

Note

It needs openedx/openedx-authz#191 to be completed to properly test it
It will remain under draft status until the backend is ready.

Best Practices Checklist

We're trying to move away from some deprecated patterns in this codebase. Please
check if your PR meets these recommendations before asking for a review:

• Any new files are using TypeScript (.ts, .tsx).
• Avoid propTypes and defaultProps in any new or modified code.
• Tests should use the helpers in src/testUtils.tsx (specifically initializeMocks)
• Do not add new fields to the Redux state/store. Use React Context to share state among multiple components.
• Use React Query to load data from REST APIs. See any apiHooks.ts in this repo for examples.
• All new i18n messages in messages.ts files have a description for translators to use.
• Avoid using ../ in import paths. To import from parent folders, use @src, e.g. import { initializeMocks } from '@src/testUtils'; instead of from '../../../../testUtils'

[openedx-webhooks]

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

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

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.

🔘 Update the status of your PR

Your PR is currently marked as a draft. After completing the steps above, update its status by clicking "Ready for Review", or removing "WIP" from the title, as appropriate.

---

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

❌ Patch coverage is 97.29730% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.51%. Comparing base (449af65) to head (88405df).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/header/hooks.tsx	90.90%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #2938    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   95.51%   95.51%            
========================================
  Files        1329     1329            
  Lines       30545    30593    +48     
  Branches     6924     6729   -195     
========================================
+ Hits        29174    29221    +47     
- Misses       1303     1316    +13     
+ Partials       68       56    -12     

☔ 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.