feat: placeholder blocks for failed import blocks

[navinkarkera]

Description

Adds placeholder blocks in home page and respective collections tab in library for failed blocks during import from course.

Useful information to include:

• Which user roles will this change impact? "Course Author".

Supporting information

• Placeholder for failed blocks? #2527
• Private-ref: https://tasks.opencraft.com/browse/FAL-4269
• Depends on: feat: store information for failed block migrations edx-platform#37691

Testing instructions

• Checkout feat: store information for failed block migrations edx-platform#37691 in edx-platform repository
• Make sure to run tutor dev exec cms ./manage.py cms migrate.
• Create a course with some components.
• Add blocks like legacy library_content block that are not supported by libraries.
• Import this course in a library.
• Verify the placeholder blocks in library home page and the course related collection.
• Verify that the placeholder blocks are not visible when the blocks are filtered.

Other information

Include anything else that will help reviewers and consumers understand the change.

• Depends on feat: store information for failed block migrations edx-platform#37691

Best Practices Checklist

We're trying to move away from some deprecated patterns in this codebase. Please
check if your PR meets these recommendations before asking for a review:

• Any new files are using TypeScript (.ts, .tsx).
• Avoid propTypes and defaultProps in any new or modified code.
• Tests should use the helpers in src/testUtils.tsx (specifically initializeMocks)
• Do not add new fields to the Redux state/store. Use React Context to share state among multiple components.
• Use React Query to load data from REST APIs. See any apiHooks.ts in this repo for examples.
• All new i18n messages in messages.ts files have a description for translators to use.
• Avoid using ../ in import paths. To import from parent folders, use @src, e.g. import { initializeMocks } from '@src/testUtils'; instead of from '../../../../testUtils'

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 97.72727% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 94.86%. Comparing base (ef36156) to head (a593a5d).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/library-authoring/data/apiHooks.ts	80.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2703   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.85%   94.86%           
=======================================
  Files        1232     1233    +1     
  Lines       27899    27937   +38     
  Branches     6316     6350   +34     
=======================================
+ Hits        26464    26502   +38     
  Misses       1364     1364           
  Partials       71       71           

☔ 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.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @navinkarkera!

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

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.

---

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.

[ChrisChV]

Looks good 👍

• I tested this: I followed the testing instructions
• I read through the code and considered the security, stability and performance implications of the changes.
• I tested that the UI can be used with a keyboard only (tab order, keyboard controls).
• Includes tests for bugfixes and/or features added.
• Includes documentation
• Includes fixtures that create objects required for manual testing.