refactor: Inject isArchivedByLearner into initial API response

[kdmccormick]

refactor: Inject isArchivedByLearner into initial API response

This both:

• demonstrates filter pipeline steps in a practical way which relates to the sample archive functionality.
• removes the need to call GET ..../course-archive-status/ in order to render the page.

The GET API still exists, as it's called to update the state after a learner clicks Archive/Unarchive (could probably be factored away, but not important)

This removes the old sample filter pipeline step, which changed the course about URL into an example.com URL.

Note: the isArchived key was already taken by the existing "course archival" feature which is an author-controlled thing.

Finally, this commit also updates the uv.lock file, which I missed in #35

Testing

Notice:

• No course-archive-status GET call
• isArchivedByLearner is in the API response

AI

I wrote the filter body. Claude wrote the frontend code, with this prompt:

do you see how frontend-plugin-sample replaces the course cards with ones that are archivable, powered by a new model and REST API defined in backend-plugin-sample? it works, but it adds an extra GET call to the course-archive-status API every time the learner dashboard is loaded.

what i recently added (in just the last commit) is a filter pipeline step to put isArchivedByLearner into the initial learner home (a.k.a. learner dashboard) API response. could you update frontend-plugin-sample to use that boolean rather than calling the course-archive-status GET API separately?

you may want to need to look at the learner dashboard source, at ../frontend-app-learner-dashboard. ask questions eagerly

Claude also wrote the tests and docstrings with my guidance, I reviewed everything.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.17%. Comparing base (913f1b1) to head (b6ab2a9).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #40      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.40%   92.17%   +3.76%     
==========================================
  Files          14       15       +1     
  Lines         414      447      +33     
  Branches       16       16              
==========================================
+ Hits          366      412      +46     
+ Misses         40       26      -14     
- Partials        8        9       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	92.17% <ø> (+3.76%)	⬆️

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.

🚀 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.