feat: add flag to filter out archived conversations when fetching list [WPB-4432]

[gongracr]

---

PR Submission Checklist for internal contributors

• The PR Title

  • conforms to the style of semantic commits messages¹ supported in Wire's Github Workflow²
  • contains a reference JIRA issue number like SQPIT-764
  • answers the question: If merged, this PR will: ... ³

• The PR Description

  • is free of optional paragraphs and you have filled the relevant parts to the best of your ability

---

What's new in this PR?

Issues

Now that we are adding user functionality to be able to archive/unarchive conversations, we are in the need of a filtering mechanism to decide whether to fetch and display the whole lot of conversations a user has, or only the non-archived ones.

Solutions

In this scenario, I decided to simply add a boolean flag on the ObserveConversationListDetailsUseCase since this use case is the most used one accross the app and Kalium to get the latest state of all users conversation items.

Testing

Test Coverage (Optional)

• I have added automated test to this contribution

---

References

1. https://sparkbox.com/foundry/semantic_commit_messages
2. https://github.com/wireapp/.github#usage
3. E.g. feat(conversation-list): Sort conversations by most emojis in the title #SQPIT-764.

[github-actions]

Unit Test Results

   439 files  ±0     439 suites  ±0   2m 42s ⏱️ +34s
2 386 tests +3  2 282 ✔️ +2  104 💤 +1  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit d3bba4d. ± Comparison against base commit 00d151f.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[datadog-wireapp]

Datadog Report

All test runs a870e9e 🔗

✅ 2 Total Test Services: 0 Failed, 0 with New Flaky, 2 Passed

Test Services

Service Name	Failed	Known Flaky	New Flaky	Passed	Skipped	Wall Time	Branch View
kalium-ios	0	0	0	1972	68	5m 57.09s	Link
kalium-jvm	0	0	0	2282	104	12m 38s	Link

[Garzas]

Just naming suggestion 😉

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #2082 (580236d) into develop (048b06f) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.
The diff coverage is 58.82%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             develop    #2082   +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage      57.94%   57.94%           
  Complexity        24       24           
==========================================
  Files           1016     1016           
  Lines          38104    38121   +17     
  Branches        3466     3469    +3     
==========================================
+ Hits           22078    22089   +11     
- Misses         14540    14543    +3     
- Partials        1486     1489    +3     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...ation/ObserveConversationListDetailsUseCaseImpl.kt	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...um/persistence/dao/conversation/ConversationDAO.kt	100.00% <ø> (ø)
.../logic/data/conversation/ConversationRepository.kt	66.75% <50.00%> (-0.27%)	⬇️
...rsation/UpdateConversationArchivedStatusUseCase.kt	65.00% <61.53%> (-1.67%)	⬇️
...ersistence/dao/conversation/ConversationDAOImpl.kt	68.71% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 048b06f...580236d. Read the comment docs.

[Garzas]

Looking good, just one small question 💪