Add section completion info to submission progress page

[timoballard]

Resolves #1872

PR checklist: submitters

• Link to an issue if possible. If there’s no issue, describe what your branch does. Even if there is an issue, a brief description in the PR is still useful.
• List any special steps reviewers have to follow to test the PR. For example, adding a local environment variable, creating a local test file, etc.
• For extra credit, submit a screen recording like this one.
• Make sure you’ve merged main into your branch shortly before creating the PR. (You should also be merging main into your branch regularly during development.)
• Make sure you’ve accounted for any migrations. When you’re about to create the PR, bring up the application locally and then run git status | grep migrations. If there are any results, you probably need to add them to the branch for the PR. Your PR should have only one new migration file for each of the component apps, except in rare circumstances; you may need to delete some and re-run python manage.py makemigrations to reduce the number to one. (Also, unless in exceptional circumstances, your PR should not delete any migration files.)
• Make sure that whatever feature you’re adding has tests that cover the feature. This includes test coverage to make sure that the previous workflow still works, if applicable.
• Make sure the full-submission.cy.js Cypress test passes, if applicable.
• Do manual testing locally. Our tests are not good enough yet to allow us to skip this step. If that’s not applicable for some reason, check this box.
• Verify that no Git surgery was necessary, or, if it was necessary at any point, repeat the testing after it’s finished.
• Once a PR is merged, keep an eye on it until it’s deployed to dev, and do enough testing on dev to verify that it deployed successfully, the feature works as expected, and the happy path for the broad feature area (such as submission) still works.

PR checklist: reviewers

• Pull the branch to your local environment and run make docker-clean; make docker-first-run && docker compose up; then run docker compose exec web /bin/bash -c "python manage.py test"
• Manually test out the changes locally, or check this box to verify that it wasn’t applicable in this case.
• Check that the PR has appropriate tests. Look out for changes in HTML/JS/JSON Schema logic that may need to be captured in Python tests even though the logic isn’t in Python.
• Verify that no Git surgery is necessary at any point (such as during a merge party), or, if it was, repeat the testing after it’s finished.

The larger the PR, the stricter we should be about these points.

[github-actions]

Terraform plan for dev

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

Terraform has compared your real infrastructure against your configuration
and found no differences, so no changes are needed.

Warning: Argument is deprecated

  with module.dev.module.database-c2g.cloudfoundry_service_instance.rds,
  on /tmp/terraform-data-dir/modules/dev.database-c2g/database/main.tf line 14, in resource "cloudfoundry_service_instance" "rds":
  14:   recursive_delete = var.recursive_delete

Since CF API v3, recursive delete is always done on the cloudcontroller side.
This will be removed in future releases

(and 4 more similar warnings elsewhere)

✅ Plan applied in Deploy to Development and Management Environment #417

[github-actions]

Terraform plan for meta

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

Terraform has compared your real infrastructure against your configuration
and found no differences, so no changes are needed.

Warning: Argument is deprecated

  with module.s3-backups.cloudfoundry_service_instance.bucket,
  on /tmp/terraform-data-dir/modules/s3-backups/s3/main.tf line 14, in resource "cloudfoundry_service_instance" "bucket":
  14:   recursive_delete = var.recursive_delete

Since CF API v3, recursive delete is always done on the cloudcontroller side.
This will be removed in future releases

✅ Plan applied in Deploy to Development and Management Environment #417

[github-actions]

File	Coverage		Missing
All files	86%	✅
api/serializers.py	88%	✅	177-178 183 188
api/test_views.py	95%	✅	103
api/uei.py	88%	✅	87 118-119 163 167-168
api/views.py	98%	✅	195-196 334-335
audit/file_downloads.py	73%	❌	35-53 81-83
audit/forms.py	47%	❌	22-29 142-149
audit/intake_to_dissemination.py	92%	✅	67-68 201-207 257
audit/test_commands.py	87%	✅
audit/test_manage_submission_access_view.py	97%	✅	15 19
audit/test_mixins.py	90%	✅	112-113 117-119 184-185 189-191
audit/test_validators.py	95%	✅	436 440 608-609 848 855 862 869
audit/test_views.py	95%	✅	410-442 451-482 491-519
audit/test_workbooks_should_fail.py	88%	✅	56 83-84 88
audit/test_workbooks_should_pass.py	90%	✅	56 71
audit/utils.py	70%	❌	13 21 33-35 38
audit/validators.py	92%	✅	137 189 283-292 299-308 486-490 495-499 515-524
audit/cross_validation/additional_ueis.py	93%	✅	33
audit/cross_validation/check_award_ref_declaration.py	90%	✅
audit/cross_validation/check_award_reference_uniqueness.py	93%	✅
audit/cross_validation/check_certifying_contacts.py	87%	✅
audit/cross_validation/check_findings_count_consistency.py	91%	✅
audit/cross_validation/check_ref_number_in_cap.py	90%	✅
audit/cross_validation/check_ref_number_in_findings_text.py	90%	✅
audit/cross_validation/errors.py	78%	❌	30 69
audit/cross_validation/naming.py	93%	✅	197
audit/cross_validation/submission_progress_check.py	95%	✅	80
audit/cross_validation/tribal_data_sharing_consent.py	81%	❌	33 36 40
audit/cross_validation/validate_general_information.py	93%	✅	28-29
audit/fixtures/single_audit_checklist.py	55%	❌	146-183 229-238
audit/intakelib/exceptions.py	71%	❌	7-9 12
audit/intakelib/intermediate_representation.py	91%	✅	27-28 73 91 129 162 200-203 212-213
audit/intakelib/mapping_audit_findings.py	97%	✅	53
audit/intakelib/mapping_audit_findings_text.py	97%	✅	52
audit/intakelib/mapping_federal_awards.py	93%	✅	95
audit/intakelib/mapping_util.py	81%	❌	21 25 29 99 104-105 114-120 130 145 150
audit/intakelib/checks/check_all_unique_award_numbers.py	79%	❌	24
audit/intakelib/checks/check_cluster_total.py	85%	✅	49 65
audit/intakelib/checks/check_finding_prior_references_pattern.py	73%	❌	33 43-44
audit/intakelib/checks/check_findings_grid_validation.py	84%	❌	58
audit/intakelib/checks/check_has_all_the_named_ranges.py	84%	❌	52
audit/intakelib/checks/check_is_a_workbook.py	69%	❌	20
audit/intakelib/checks/check_loan_balance_entries.py	78%	❌	22 39-40
audit/intakelib/checks/check_loan_balance_present.py	76%	❌	27 36
audit/intakelib/checks/check_look_for_empty_rows.py	91%	✅	18
audit/intakelib/checks/check_no_major_program_no_type.py	76%	❌	18 27
audit/intakelib/checks/check_no_repeat_findings.py	76%	❌	21 30
audit/intakelib/checks/check_other_cluster_names.py	81%	❌	24 34
audit/intakelib/checks/check_passthrough_name_when_no_direct.py	88%	✅	9 47
audit/intakelib/checks/check_sequential_award_numbers.py	76%	❌	14 22
audit/intakelib/checks/check_show_ir.py	70%	❌	8-14
audit/intakelib/checks/check_start_and_end_rows_of_all_columns_are_same.py	89%	✅	14
audit/intakelib/checks/check_state_cluster_names.py	65%	❌	23-24 34
audit/intakelib/checks/check_version_number.py	73%	❌	21 31-32
audit/intakelib/checks/runners.py	95%	✅	129
audit/intakelib/common/util.py	89%	✅	21 38
audit/intakelib/transforms/xform_reformat_prior_references.py	55%	❌	12-17
audit/intakelib/transforms/xform_rename_additional_notes_sheet.py	81%	❌	14
audit/management/commands/load_fixtures.py	46%	❌	39-45
audit/models/models.py	82%	❌	57 59 64 66 216 228-231 249 422 440-441 449 471 560-561 565 573 582 588
audit/views/manage_submission_access.py	92%	✅	76-82
audit/views/submission_progress_view.py	96%	✅	171-172
audit/views/tribal_data_consent.py	34%	❌	23-41 44-79
audit/views/unlock_after_certification.py	57%	❌	28-47 69-83
audit/views/upload_report_view.py	26%	❌	32-35 44 91-117 120-170 178-209
audit/views/views.py	31%	❌	80-101 124-125 199-200 245-246 257-258 260-264 311-324 327-341 346-359 376-382 387-407 410-438 443-472 475-519 524-544 547-575 580-609 612-656 661-673 676-686 691-703 730-731 736-785 788-828 831-848
census_historical_migration/base_field_maps.py	93%	✅	29-30
census_historical_migration/sac_general_lib/report_id_generator.py	68%	❌	11-18 27-28
census_historical_migration/sac_general_lib/utils.py	23%	❌	11-32 36-56 62-64
census_historical_migration/transforms/xform_string_to_bool.py	11%	❌	4-14
census_historical_migration/transforms/xform_string_to_date.py	22%	❌	6-15
census_historical_migration/transforms/xform_string_to_int.py	55%	❌	4 6 13-14
census_historical_migration/transforms/xform_string_to_string.py	60%	❌	6 8
census_historical_migration/workbooklib/excel_creation_utils.py	51%	❌	130-135 140-142 147-151 155-170 183-187 191-221 225
census_historical_migration/workbooklib/notes_to_sefa.py	53%	❌	31-35 84-90 98-104 112 119-155
config/test_settings.py	90%	✅	21-22 39-40 55-56
config/urls.py	71%	❌	83
dissemination/models.py	99%	✅	461
dissemination/search.py	59%	❌	55-83 90-100
dissemination/views.py	82%	❌	106 108-110 135 187 189 191
dissemination/migrations/0002_general_fac_accepted_date.py	47%	❌	10-12
djangooidc/backends.py	78%	❌	32 57-63
djangooidc/exceptions.py	66%	❌	19 21 23 28
djangooidc/oidc.py	16%	❌	32-35 45-51 64-70 92-149 153-199 203-226 230-275 280-281 286
djangooidc/views.py	80%	❌	22 43 114
djangooidc/tests/common.py	96%	✅
report_submission/forms.py	92%	✅	35
report_submission/views.py	76%	❌	83 215-216 218 240-241 260-261 287-396 399-409
report_submission/templatetags/get_attr.py	76%	❌	8 11-14 18
support/admin.py	88%	✅	76 79 84 91-97 100-102
support/cog_over.py	91%	✅	30-33 93 145
support/models.py	89%	✅	103-104
support/test_cog_over.py	98%	✅	134-135 224
support/management/commands/seed_cog_baseline.py	98%	✅	20-21
tools/update_program_data.py	89%	✅	96
users/admin.py	98%	✅	25
users/auth.py	96%	✅	58-59
users/models.py	96%	✅	18 74-75
users/fixtures/user_fixtures.py	91%	✅

Minimum allowed coverage is 85%

Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against a1be031

[tadhg-ohiggins]

How difficult would it be to move a lot of this into sac_validation_shape() instead? That function already takes a SingleAuditChecklist instance as an argument, and we could put the per-section information into the sf_sac_meta field in the dictionary it returns, instead of altering the other functions to also require taking a SingleAuditChecklist argument.

[jperson1]

This works great! I'll hold off on a merge in case the code wants to move around.

[jadudm]

LGTM.