Fixes Issue #10752, allows for sorting by publisher verification

[ryanml]

Submitter Checklist:

• Submitted a ticket for my issue if one did not already exist.
• Used Github auto-closing keywords in the commit message.
• Added/updated tests for this change (for new code or code which already has tests).
• Ran git rebase -i to squash commits (if needed).
• Tagged reviewers and labelled the pull request as needed.
• Request a security/privacy review as needed. (Ask a Brave employee to help if you cannot access this document.)

Resolves #10752

Test Plan:
This can be done through the UI.

1. Navigate to about:preferences#payments
2. Click on the first column header to sort by publisher verification status
3. Ensure that the ordering toggles for verified publishers (ASC/DESC)

Reviewer Checklist:

• Request a security/privacy review as needed if one was not already requested.

Tests

• Adequate test coverage exists to prevent regressions
• Tests should be independent and work correctly when run individually or as a suite ref
• New files have MPL2 license header

This is a very simple fix for issue #10752. The SortableTable component looks to the 'value' property of a row object as its basis for sorting (We should mimic the configuration for the included row object, where the value property is either set to 1 or 0, depending on whether its turned on). Now the Verified Publisher column sorts as expected. Thanks!

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #12750 into master will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #12750      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.09%   56.06%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         279      279              
  Lines       27302    27303       +1     
  Branches     4441     4442       +1     
==========================================
- Hits        15316    15308       -8     
- Misses      11986    11995       +9

Flag	Coverage Δ
#unittest	56.06% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...erer/components/preferences/payment/ledgerTable.js	87.81% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
js/stores/appStoreRenderer.js	91.17% <0%> (-8.83%)	⬇️
app/renderer/components/reduxComponent.js	84.61% <0%> (-6.16%)	⬇️
js/stores/windowStore.js	27.25% <0%> (-0.31%)	⬇️

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc thanks for taking a look at this! :)

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc there is one possible improvment I can make to this PR (It serves more of a visual purpose than a functional one)

Currently, if a publisher is verified and included, the verification icon is green, if a publisher is verified and not included, the verification icon is not filled and is gray.

The fix in this PR is technically functionally satisfying, as it does sort by whether a publisher is verified or not, but it does look a little odd if the non included publishers are staggered throughout the ordering.

If you feel that it would beneficial for inclusion to factor in to the ordering as well, I can adjust the ternary in that value property to:

verified ? (this.enabledForSite(synopsis) ? 2 : 1) : 0

This will assign a value of 2 to verified and included publishers, a value of 1 to verified but not included publishers, and 0 for neither verified nor included. (I think this ends up looking a little nicer :)

Let me know your thoughts and I can push this in a commit to this PR.

[NejcZdovc]

@ryanml I like the idea, go for it

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc I've pushed the improvement :)

[NejcZdovc]

Looks good to me. Tested it out and it's working perfectly. Congrats on you first PR 🎉 Will merge it as soon as 0.20 is released

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc awesome! :) Thanks so much

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc was 0.20 released? :)

[NejcZdovc]

@ryanml it was 😃

[ryanml]

@NejcZdovc great! Excited to see this fix in place, I'm working on another as we speak :)

[NejcZdovc]

master fd95339
0.22 2d14fb3
0.21 d3f8fd1

[NejcZdovc]

0.21 twitch e0670fd