Create test reports widget

What does this MR do and why?

Introduce test reports widget for work items and expose it on GraphQL.

This only exposes testReports collection. In a follow-up, we should also add lastTestReportManuallyCreated field.

related to #382590 (closed)

How to set up and validate locally

Requirements feature is only available with an Ultimate license.

1. Create a requirement work item using GitLab UI and take its global id. You can take the global id using Graphql or executing the following in rails console:

  WorkItem.requirement.last.to_global_id.to_s

2. Create test reports for the requirement. It is possible to generate test reports objects manually by switching a requirement status using the UI. To do that you can edit a requirement twice, toggling it to satisfied and then to failed, this should associate two test reports objects to it.
3. Execute the following GraphQL query using the requirement global id created in the first step:

query workItem {
  workItem(id: "REQUIREMENT_GLOBAL_ID") {
    title
    widgets {
      ... on WorkItemWidgetTestReports {
        testReports {
          edges {
            node {
              id
              state
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

You should see a collection of test reports associated to the requirement.

MR acceptance checklist

This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

• I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.

assigned to @felipe_artur

added backend frontend labels

	1 Warning
	If you are in a revert MR, consider using the revert MR template to add labels to skip changelog checks (docs). If this is reverting something in the current milestone, we don't need to add a changelog. In this case, we can skip changelog checks by adding ~"regression:*" label, and re-run the danger job (there is a link at the bottom of this comment).

	1 Message
	This merge request adds or changes documentation files. A review from the Technical Writing team before you merge is recommended. Reviews can happen after you merge.

Documentation review

The following files require a review from a technical writer:

• doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md (Link to current live version)

The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:

• Metadata for the *.md files that you've changed. The first few lines of each *.md file identify the stage and group most closely associated with your docs change.
• The Technical Writer assigned for that stage and group.
• Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	Serhii Yarynovskyi (@syarynovskyi) (UTC+2, 5 hours ahead of @felipe_artur)	Bojan Marjanović (@bmarjanovic) (UTC+1, 4 hours ahead of @felipe_artur)
frontend	Tan Le (@tle_gitlab) (UTC+11, 14 hours ahead of @felipe_artur)	Paul Slaughter (@pslaughter) (UTC-6, 3 hours behind @felipe_artur)

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

Proper labels assigned to this merge request. Please ignore me.

@felipe_artur - please see the following guidance and update this merge request.

	1 Error
	Please add typebug typefeature, or typemaintenance label to this merge request.

Bundle size analysis [beta]

This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 1d3190e7 and 05ff1d90

Special assets

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
average	3.56 MB	3.56 MB	-	0.0 %
mainChunk	1.95 MB	1.95 MB	-	0.0 %

---

Note: We do not have exact data for 1d3190e7. So we have used data from: c1bc5aa1.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun the bundle-size-review job
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.

Please look at the full report for more details

---

Read more about how this report works.

Generated by Danger

added 1 commit

• a71f347c - Create test reports widget

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• c475998f - Create test reports widget

Compare with previous version

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

e2e-review-qa: test report for 05ff1d90

expand test summary

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            suites summary                             |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|                  | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Framework sanity | 9      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 10    | ✅     |
| Monitor          | 4      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 4     | ✅     |
| Create           | 28     | 0      | 1       | 0     | 29    | ✅     |
| Verify           | 12     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 12    | ✅     |
| Govern           | 27     | 0      | 5       | 0     | 32    | ✅     |
| Plan             | 49     | 0      | 1       | 0     | 50    | ✅     |
| Package          | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Manage           | 33     | 0      | 3       | 0     | 36    | ✅     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total            | 162    | 0      | 12      | 0     | 174   | ✅     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

Setting label ~"group::certify" based on @felipe_artur's group.

added 1 deleted label

added 1 commit

• 9f3d18f7 - Create test reports widget

Compare with previous version

added devopsplan sectiondev labels

added documentation featureaddition typefeature labels

resolved all threads

added Category:Requirements Management label

marked this merge request as ready

marked the checklist item I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR. as completed

changed the description

@egrieff Can you do the first review here, please? 

This is also asking for a docs review related to the change at possible_types.json. I believe we can skip it.