[MM-63516] Target LegalHold users by groups

[davidkrauser]

Summary

This change adds support for specifying LDAP groups when defining Legal Hold users. Previously, administrators could only select individual users. Now, they can specify groups, and all users within those groups will be included in the legal hold report. This makes managing users in a report much easier and more scalable.

Ticket Link

https://mattermost.atlassian.net/browse/MM-63516

Changes

The commits in this PR are roughly grouped by specific change:

New Features

• Legal Hold Struct Update (62319cf): Added group IDs to the legal hold struct to retrieve users during execution.
• Legal Hold Execution Update (07e8c0d): Modified execution logic to include all users from specified groups in the report.
• Group Search API (511d72e): Added an API to search for groups by display name, enabling autocomplete in the web UI.
• Group Input in UI (522a525, 3cff45a, eea0ae0):
  • Added a group input component with name autocomplete. This is an almost identical copy of the user input component.
  • Added group input fields to the legal hold creation and editing forms.
  • Displayed group information in the legal hold table.
• Group Info API (8975922): Added an API call to retrieve relevant group info.
  • Without this, we won't have group information to show in the legal hold editing form.

Bug Fixes & Maintenance

• Job Execution Bug Fix (afa23cd): Fixed an issue where a job execution error could cause an infinite loop. We now stop executing on error.
• Lint Fixes (12ca57f): Addressed various minor linting issues.

Limitations

The end user is currently limited to 5000 users in a group. This is way more than I expect a user will use, and thus isn't a real limitation. I included this just to ensure we don't have an unbounded group size. It's specified here, and can be updated later if we want to limit it further:

mattermost-plugin-legal-hold/server/legalhold/legal_hold.go

Lines 487 to 488 in 07e8c0d

	const GroupPageLimit = 100
	const GroupPageSize = 50

The real limit is still the total number of posts that can be included in a report, which is specified here:

mattermost-plugin-legal-hold/server/legalhold/legal_hold.go

Line 22 in 07e8c0d

const PostExportBatchLimit = 10000

Video Demo

Here is a video of the new UI components in action:

legal-hold-group-ui.webm

Update: you can now search by group @-name

This was requested here: #137 (comment)

search-by-name.webm

[davidkrauser]

@fmartingr some of the Playwright Tests are failing on this PR, but I don't believe they are related to my change. For example: ensure server has license is failing.

I know you recently made fixes for Playwright Tests - do you have any ideas on why they may be failing here?

[fmartingr]

@fmartingr some of the Playwright Tests are failing on this PR, but I don't believe they are related to my change. For example: ensure server has license is failing.

I know you recently made fixes for Playwright Tests - do you have any ideas on why they may be failing here?

I investigated a bit and there was a change on the trial request this week, country code is now mandatory. I've managed this in a new PR and I'm waiting on directions on how to fill the country field: #138

[fmartingr]

Great work on this! Left a few non-blocking comments/questions.

[BenCookie95]

Looks mostly good! Just a few comments

[BenCookie95]

LGTM, nice work

[AayushChaudhary0001]

@davidkrauser We need to run this job whenever we want for testing, for which there is already a PR created #129 . Is there any other way to run this job(one could be manually hitting the API through postman) since this PR is not merged yet?

[davidkrauser]

@AayushChaudhary0001 we could wait until #129 merges before testing this if that helps - it looks like that one is close to finished. WDYT?

[AayushChaudhary0001]

@davidkrauser It consists of some comments, which should not take much time to fix. Once that is merged, we can quickly test this as well as it would help us in the completion. Let me know if this works for you.

[davidkrauser]

@AayushChaudhary0001 that would work just fine, thank you.

[davidkrauser]

@AayushChaudhary0001 This should be ready to be looked at again when you are available. I've merged in the latest from 'main' and fixed up the conflicts.