refactor: standardize the course & library roles-permissions data

[dcoa]

Summary

Brings the roles-permissions/course and roles-permissions/library constant files to a single, consistent shape, fixes several wrong library permission labels, and relocates the shared permission-matrix utilities out of library/. No user-facing behavior change beyond the corrected labels.

What & why

1. Correct library permission metadata (bug fix): Several libraryPermissions entries had labels/icons that didn't match their key or description (reminding from my previous refactor):

• DELETE_LIBRARY was labeled "Publish" now "Delete".
• Collection permissions were shifted: CREATE_LIBRARY_COLLECTION showed "View", EDIT showed "Publish", DELETE showed "Edit", corrected to Create / Edit / Delete with matching icons.
• MANAGE_LIBRARY_TAGS labeled as "Manage tag" to "Manage tags".

2. Standardize course to the library pattern: course/constants.ts previously hand-maintained a verbose rolesObject and a separate courseRolesMetadata, duplicating each role's name/description and repeating the near-identical admin/staff permission arrays. It now mirrors library:

• courseRolesMetadata is the single metadata source,
• a COURSE_ROLE_PERMISSIONS lookup map holds each role's permission keys,
• the full Role[] is derived via courseRolesMetadata.map(...).

3. Consistent naming & formatting

• Verbose naming for rolesObject (courseRolesWithPermissions) and rolesLibraryObject (libraryRolesWithPermissions): now a clear family with courseRolesMetadata / libraryRolesMetadata (metadata) vs *RolesWithPermissions (roles + permissions). Updated across the barrel, RolesPermissions, UserPermissions, and the test mocks/spies.
• Both files use the same one-field-per-line object formatting.

4. Relocate the shared matrix utilities: buildPermissionMatrixByResource / getPermissionMetadata are generic (used by both course and library), so they moved from library/utils.ts to roles-permissions/utils.ts, are exposed via the barrel (index.ts), and UserPermissions imports them through it instead of reaching into library/. The expanded permissions view now enriches labels via getPermissionMetadata, matching the matrix.

5. Relocate messages from RolesPermissions.tsx: The messages where still tightened to library despite of covering feature labeling.

Note I am not removing/adding any role in this PR or verifying alignment with the backend, it is mostly formatting fixing.

AI use acknowledgement

Supported by Claude Code

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @dcoa!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/committers-frontend.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

• If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
  • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
• If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

• Dependencies

  This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

• Blockers

  This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

• Timeline information

  This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

• Partner information

  This is for a course on edx.org.

• Supporting documentation
• Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Details

---

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

• Overview of Review Process for Community Contributions
• Pull Request Status Guide
• Making changes to your pull request

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

• The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
• The need for product review
• Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.45%. Comparing base (e3d90d8) to head (2813f91).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #170      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.44%   97.45%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          66       66              
  Lines        1525     1533       +8     
  Branches      386      388       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         1486     1494       +8     
  Misses         39       39              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.