Integration tests: Add new test for privileges main page

[veronnicka]

Followed hbac_service.feature which main page is very similar

This PR is built on top of #1134 , can be reviewed but we will have to wait for the rebase for the checks to pass

Summary by Sourcery

Add integration tests for privileges main page covering privilege creation, search, deletion, bulk deletion, and cancel flows.

New Features:

• Introduce a Cypress Cucumber feature spec for privileges CRUD operations on the main page.
• Add step definitions to seed and delete privileges via IPA commands for test setup and cleanup.

Tests:

• Add end-to-end scenarios for adding, searching, deleting single and multiple privileges, and cancelling privilege creation on the privileges page.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey - I've left some high level feedback:

• There are multiple identical @seed scenarios creating the same privileges (e.g., a_privilege1, a_privilege2); consider consolidating these into a shared setup (Background or a single seed scenario) to reduce duplication and make the test flow clearer.
• The cleanup steps only explicitly remove a_privilege1 and a_privilege2; if a_privilege3 or other test data can persist beyond their scenarios, it may be worth adding corresponding cleanup steps to keep the test environment consistent between runs.
• In privileges.ts, the cy.ipa calls are fire-and-forget; if these setup/teardown steps need to be chained with other Cypress commands, consider returning the cy.ipa call from the step definitions to integrate properly with Cypress’s command queue.

Prompt for AI Agents

Please address the comments from this code review:

## Overall Comments
- There are multiple identical `@seed` scenarios creating the same privileges (e.g., `a_privilege1`, `a_privilege2`); consider consolidating these into a shared setup (Background or a single seed scenario) to reduce duplication and make the test flow clearer.
- The cleanup steps only explicitly remove `a_privilege1` and `a_privilege2`; if `a_privilege3` or other test data can persist beyond their scenarios, it may be worth adding corresponding cleanup steps to keep the test environment consistent between runs.
- In `privileges.ts`, the `cy.ipa` calls are fire-and-forget; if these setup/teardown steps need to be chained with other Cypress commands, consider returning the `cy.ipa` call from the step definitions to integrate properly with Cypress’s command queue.

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[carma12]

Haven't fully tried it locally yet because it requires to rebase the changes from #1134 , but found something that can be addressed. See comment below:

[carma12]

@veronnicka - Removed the needs-review tag on this PR to leave the needs-rebase only as reminder (we can add the other later when everything is updated and rebased).

[veronnicka]

The code is rebased and the checks are passing. Please have a look @carma12

[carma12]

Maybe we can add a new test that checks the addition of a new Privilege with description, but it's completely fine if we don't include it. Apart from that, LGTM.

[veronnicka]

Maybe we can add a new test that checks the addition of a new Privilege with description, but it's completely fine if we don't include it. Apart from that, LGTM.

The first tests adds a privilige with a description. Is that what you meant?