feat: add support to hasUnmetPrerequisitesList in CourseBanner

[jignaciopm]

Description

This pull request enhances the CourseBanner component to provide learners with more detailed feedback when they have unmet prerequisites for a course. Instead of showing a generic message, the banner now lists the specific prerequisite courses with links to their details. The changes also update the related message text and add comprehensive tests to ensure this new functionality works as expected.

Improvements to unmet prerequisites banner:

• The CourseBanner component now accepts a new property, hasUnmetPrerequisitesList, from coursewareAccess, which contains details about unmet prerequisite courses.
• The banner for unmet prerequisites now displays a list of prerequisite courses as clickable links, providing learners with direct access to more information about each prerequisite.

Messaging updates:

• The message shown to learners with unmet prerequisites has been updated to clarify that specific prerequisites are listed.

Testing enhancements:

• The unit test for the unmet prerequisites banner now verifies that the prerequisite courses are displayed as links with the correct URLs, ensuring the new functionality works as intended.

Supporting information

#753

Testing instructions

First, you need to use edx-platform with this commit, then you can follow the next steps:

• Create a simple course in Studio.
• Go to "Advanced settings" and set "Enable subsection prerequisites" ON (true).
• Go to "Schedule & details" and set in "Prerequisite course" whatever you want.
• Go to Learner Dashboard and you will see something similar to this:

Deadline

"None" if there's no rush, or provide a specific date or event (and reason) if there is one.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @jignaciopm!

This repository is currently maintained by @2U-aperture.

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.

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.58%. Comparing base (19ccb8a) to head (a78ae17).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #760      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.54%   97.58%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         148      148              
  Lines        1302     1327      +25     
  Branches      224      248      +24     
==========================================
+ Hits         1270     1295      +25     
  Misses         31       31              
  Partials        1        1              

☔ 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.

[itsjeyd]

@jignaciopm Thank you for your contribution!

@sarina Looking at #753 and the related openedx/edx-platform#37737, it seems like this would qualify as a clear-scope bug fix from product perspective. I'll ping the product managers team shortly, but let me know if you think this is a special case that won't require product review at all (considering that it's supposed to fix an issue from Ulmo release testing).

CC @mphilbrick211 for openedx/edx-platform#37737

[itsjeyd]

Hi @openedx/openedx-product-managers, here's a clear-scope bug fix for you to review. Could one of you please have a look at the changes from this PR and openedx/edx-platform#37737?

[sarina]

This is reviewed & approved by Product; I am awaiting a sandbox which demonstrates the fix before finding a reviewer.

[sarina]

This is approved from a product perspective. @diana-villalvazo-wgu or @jacobo-dominguez-wgu do you have a moment to take a look at this? It feels unlikely we can get it into ulmo.1 but perhaps we can get it in to ulmo.2?