PSP-6738 : Allow Contractor to Create Files

[eddherrera]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

✅ No secrets were detected in the code.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3407 (1f3658e) into dev (39b2447) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 48.57%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #3407      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.20%   72.15%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1324     1326       +2     
  Lines       30813    30842      +29     
  Branches     5740     5744       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        22247    22254       +7     
- Misses       8328     8348      +20     
- Partials      238      240       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	72.15% <48.57%> (-0.05%)	⬇️

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

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...quisition/Controllers/AcquisitionFileController.cs	69.87% <ø> (ø)
.../api/Helpers/Middleware/ErrorHandlingMiddleware.cs	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...nd/core/Exceptions/ContractorNotInTeamException.cs	25.00% <25.00%> (ø)
...pi/Helpers/Extensions/AcquisitionFileExtensions.cs	50.00% <50.00%> (ø)
...quisition/hooks/useAddAcquisitionFormManagement.ts	86.95% <70.00%> (-13.05%)	⬇️
...rce/backend/api/Services/AcquisitionFileService.cs	73.20% <100.00%> (+0.05%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[devinleighsmith]

@eddherrera this scares me a bit since normally business rule validation exceptions return a 400. I think this is a bit risky, as now other business rule violations within the service layer will get interpretated as a 409. Also the frontend will start displaying any response with a 409 in a toast where it may not be doing that currently.

Could we do something a bit safer here? maybe something like how the user override code gets returned from the backend?
`
else if (ex is UserOverrideException)
{
var exception = ex as UserOverrideException;
code = HttpStatusCode.Conflict;
message = exception.Message;
errorCode = (ex as UserOverrideException).UserOverride?.Code;

            _logger.LogError(ex, "User override required to complete this action.");
        }
        `

or perhaps we just handle this issue on the frontend entirely? We should already know if a user is a contractor, should be easy to check if they are on the acq team of the file they are creating as well?

[github-actions]

✅ No secrets were detected in the code.

[github-actions]

✅ No secrets were detected in the code.