Resolve role sharing conflicts in app sharing

[ShanChathusanda93]

Purpose

• $subject
• From [1] role management will be enabled in the sub organization level as well.
• With that, in the sub organization level, there will be two types of roles.
  • Shared roles from the root organization (through the application sharing)
  • Roles created inside the sub organization directly.
• There can be conflicts when the roles are created in the sub organization level.
• This PR contains the fixes for the following conflicting scenarios.
  • Sub organization has a role named role01 and an organization audience application will be shared from the root organization and root organization contains a role named role01
    • App sharing will be restricted to that corresponding conflicting sub organization.
  • Sub organization has a role named role01 and already an organization audienace app is shared. Now in the root organization a new organization role will be created with a name role01.
    • Root organization role will not be shared to the conflicting sub organization.
  • Sub organization has a role named role01 and already an organization audienace app is shared. Now in the root organization an existing role is renamed to role01.
    • Role name modification will not be propogated to the conflicting sub organization.

[1] wso2/product-is#21208

Goals

• Resolving role sharing conflicts.

Approach

• Restricting the conflicting resource or the main resource that initiated the conflicting resource sharing to the conflicting sub organization

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 63.88889% with 26 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 31.03%. Comparing base (c30fb79) to head (c470073).
Report is 22 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ation/management/handler/SharedRoleMgtHandler.java	66.66%	22 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...gement/handler/listener/SharedRoleMgtListener.java	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #413      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     29.01%   31.03%   +2.01%     
- Complexity      385      440      +55     
============================================
  Files            50       61      +11     
  Lines          4146     4386     +240     
  Branches        478      496      +18     
============================================
+ Hits           1203     1361     +158     
- Misses         2842     2913      +71     
- Partials        101      112      +11     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unit	31.03% <63.88%> (?)

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.

[AnuradhaSK]

Add unit tests

[ShanChathusanda93]

Unit tests added to the new improvement

[AnuradhaSK]

use the constant defined in role mgt side

[ShanChathusanda93]

Once the PR [1] is merged we can use them here

[1] wso2/carbon-identity-framework#6010

[AnuradhaSK]

we are not asserting anything here

[ShanChathusanda93]

Here the assertion is the exception
expectedExceptions = IdentityEventException.class

[AnuradhaSK]

Yes this is correct, wanted to add this in last test method

[jenkins-is-staging]

PR builder started
Link: https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/11973410045

[jenkins-is-staging]

PR builder completed
Link: https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/11973410045
Status: success

[jenkins-is-staging]

Approving the pull request based on the successful pr build https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/11973410045

[jenkins-is-staging]

PR builder started
Link: https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/12116587383

[jenkins-is-staging]

PR builder completed
Link: https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/12116587383
Status: success

[jenkins-is-staging]

Approving the pull request based on the successful pr build https://github.com/wso2/product-is/actions/runs/12116587383