Add enable lock file action checkbox

[phil-davis]

Description

Adds a checkbox to admin settings "Manual File Locking" to "Enable manual file locking on clients"

Checking the checkbox does the same as:

occ config:app:set files enable_lock_file_action --value yes

Unchecking does the same as:

occ config:app:set files enable_lock_file_action --value no

Note: the 3rd commit adjusts the checkbox description so that it says "Enable manual file locking on clients".

Related Issue

This is a follow-on enhancement from all the file locking additions.

Also related to the discussion in #37620 about the meaning/interpretation of this setting. Any client that wants to support manual file locking can check this when deciding whether to give the user options for locking files. (A separate PR proposes to expose this setting in the capabilities API endpoint)

How Has This Been Tested?

Manually check the new checkbox, the browse to the Files page and confirm that the "Lock file" action is available for a file.

Manually uncheck the new checkbox, the browse to the Files page and confirm that the "Lock file" action is not available for a file.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Database schema changes (next release will require increase of minor version instead of patch)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Technical debt
• Tests only (no source changes)

Checklist:

• Code changes
• Unit tests added
• Acceptance tests added
• Documentation ticket raised:
• Changelog item, see TEMPLATE

[phil-davis]

This moves PR #37702 over to master branch. I cherry-picked various commits from release-10.5.0 because they are needed before this checkbox is added, but are not in master yet.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #37720 into master will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 33.33%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #37720      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     64.71%   64.71%   -0.01%     
  Complexity    19386    19386              
============================================
  Files          1283     1283              
  Lines         75732    75734       +2     
  Branches       1333     1333              
============================================
+ Hits          49009    49010       +1     
- Misses        26331    26332       +1     
  Partials        392      392              

Flag	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
#javascript	54.03% <ø> (ø)	0.00 <ø> (ø)
#phpunit	65.89% <33.33%> (-0.01%)	19386.00 <0.00> (ø)

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
apps/files/lib/App.php	20.00% <0.00%> (ø)	3.00 <0.00> (ø)
...tings/templates/panels/admin/persistentlocking.php	66.66% <0.00%> (-33.34%)	0.00 <0.00> (ø)
settings/Panels/Admin/PersistentLocking.php	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)	4.00 <0.00> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9fd1660...232f3d6. Read the comment docs.

[phil-davis]

@micbar who should review this?
(and who can give me hints how the codecov can be improved)

[pmaier1]

👍 from my side

[phil-davis]

What happens about code coverage?
These are changes to template panels... Are there unit tests to enhance?