[Feature] Add claim verification UI

[esizer]

🤖 Resolves #10418

👋 Introduction

Adds the UI for admins to verify claims made by candidates.

🕵️ Details

There were some changes to validation since they were too strict. While currently we won't be setting an expiry date for rejected claims (and hide the field) it should not be prohibited so those rules and the test for it have been removed.

🧪 Testing

1. Build pnpm run dev
2. Login as admin [email protected]
3. Make no veteran or priority claims on your profile
4. Apply to a pool
5. Navigate to the application in admin
6. Confirm no claims appear in "Other information"
7. Update profile to make both claims
8. Apply to pool
9. Navigate tot application in admin
10. Confirm claims appear as unverified
11. Confirm you can update claims and UI updates as expected

• Expiration date should not appear unless you select the "verified" option
• Expiration date is only required when priority status is verified

📸 Screenshot

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 16.54135% with 111 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 38.45%. Comparing base (985936f) to head (ac608cf).
Report is 46 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ents/ClaimVerification/ClaimVerificationDialog.tsx	0.00%	60 Missing ⚠️
...datePage/components/ClaimVerification/ClaimRow.tsx	0.00%	28 Missing ⚠️
...components/ClaimVerification/ClaimVerification.tsx	0.00%	22 Missing ⚠️
...es/ViewPoolCandidatePage/ViewPoolCandidatePage.tsx	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #10502      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     31.57%   38.45%   +6.87%     
- Complexity        0     1421    +1421     
============================================
  Files           777     1002     +225     
  Lines         25124    30763    +5639     
  Branches       6570     6589      +19     
============================================
+ Hits           7933    11829    +3896     
- Misses        17015    18911    +1896     
+ Partials        176       23     -153     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	71.16% <100.00%> (?)
unittests	31.31% <2.63%> (-0.26%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[vd1992]

There were some changes to validation since they were too strict. While currently we won't be setting an expiry date for rejected claims (and hide the field) it should not be prohibited so those rules and the test for it have been removed.

Are we sure about this, @petertgiles requested it to be like so in the first place #10434 (comment)

[esizer]

Are we sure about this, @petertgiles requested it to be like so in the first place #10434 (comment)

💀 @Jerryescandon Said we do not need to restrict it, just prefer they did not.

[esizer]

Slightly out of scope but would help with testing if the veterans were actually veterans 😛

Yeah, that makes sense but I also found some other issues with the ROD seeders so I feel like if we start toying with them here it could expand the scope too far 😛

[vd1992]

Slightly out of scope but would help with testing if the veterans were actually veterans 😛

Yeah, that makes sense but I also found some other issues with the ROD seeders so I feel like if we start toying with them here it could expand the scope too far 😛

In that case, please make an issue combining them

[esizer]

In that case, please make an issue combining them

Issue created:

• 🐛 Veteran/Non-veteran pool candidate seeding not accurate #10507

[vd1992]

In that case, please make an issue combining them

Issue created:

* [🐛 Veteran/Non-veteran pool candidate seeding not accurate #10507](https://github.com/GCTC-NTGC/gc-digital-talent/issues/10507)

Thanks, I also meant to combine the other problems you found into that issue. If they are small tweaks that is

[vd1992]

Seems to work fine, just a few things to bring to your attention

[vd1992]

Great work as usual. Nothing else seems amiss to me.
🏆