feat: User agreements API for generic agreement records

[xitij2000]

Description

This change adds a new kind of generic user agreement that allows plugins or even the core platform to record a user's acknowledgement of an agreement.

Supporting information

Product Review: openedx/platform-roadmap#465

Testing instructions

• This creates a new REST API at /api/agreements/v1/agreement/<agreement_id>
• You can use GET, which will return a 404 if a user hasn't acknowledged the agreement, or the timestamp of acceptance if they have
• You can do a simple empty POST to mark acknowledgement
• You can use the ?after=... query param with get to filter agreements after that date

Deadline

"None"

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @xitij2000!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-openedx-platform.

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.

🔘 Update the status of your PR

Your PR is currently marked as a draft. After completing the steps above, update its status by clicking "Ready for Review", or removing "WIP" from the title, as appropriate.

---

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.

[kaustavb12]

👍

• I tested this: Tested in local setup
• I read through the code

[xitij2000]

@mphilbrick211 We were just discussing internally about what the process for reviewing such a PR should be. It doesn't fall into the product review category, but it does introduce a new API.

[feanil]

@xitij2000 there is the API but I think the fact that we're introducing a model that tracks arbitrary agreements is a product feature that should get some sort of product review, your open question about whether the content of the agreement should be stored here or not is a good one. I could also imagine having the aggreements stored in their own model that this model foreign keys to for efficiency also. The other aggerements being tracked here are explicity so I think discussing why it's useful for the platform to support generic aggrements in the core is an open question.

[xitij2000]

@feanil Sure, I will allocate some time to move this through product review.

Re: Storing agreements in a model. For our client's use case, this would need to be a link to an agreement page, in which case having that being in siteconfiguration was sufficient. Perhaps instead it can be an Agreement that can either have text or an external link with an update date.

In any case I'll allocate some time next sprint for this.

[feanil]

Another question to answer in your product review is why this needs to be a core product feature rather than a backend plugin that introduces the new agreements models you need?

[xitij2000]

@feanil I don't think it particularly needs to be a core product feature other than that being ideal if such a feature is more widely desired. This would be pretty easy to extract out into a plugin.

[feanil]

@xitij2000 I don't think we need this as a core product feature right now, let's make it a plugin for now and if we need to make updates to the core we can do that in order to enable this plugin.

[itsjeyd]

@feanil Would there be an option for the plugin repo to be added to the openedx organization in the medium/long term? Speaking in terms of OEP-57, I guess another way to phrase this question would be, do you see a path forward where the plugin could become an official extension?

CC @xitij2000 @viadanna @kaustavb12 @cassiezamparini

[feanil]

@itsjeyd yes, I could see a path if this was something that the Product team wanted. I think to make that decision this would have to go through the product proposal process.

[itsjeyd]

Thanks @feanil, we'll go that route.

[mphilbrick211]

Hi @itsjeyd @xitij2000! Is this still in progress?

[xitij2000]

@mphilbrick211 We currently have a product proposal being worked on for this. I will post the link here once one exists.

[feanil]

@xitij2000 I moved this to draft until the product proposal process concludes.

[itsjeyd]

Product review for this PR is complete.

Product review ticket: openedx/platform-roadmap#465

@xitij2000 Could you link to the product review ticket from the PR description as well? (And remove the Open Questions section while you're at it, it's probably not needed any longer?)

[xitij2000]

Product review for this PR is complete.

Product review ticket: openedx/platform-roadmap#465

@xitij2000 Could you link to the product review ticket from the PR description as well? (And remove the Open Questions section while you're at it, it's probably not needed any longer?)

I've made the updates, but I'm not clear on the next step here. Is this approved for merging? Or do we need to move it to a plugin?

[itsjeyd]

@xitij2000

I've made the updates,

Thanks!

but I'm not clear on the next step here. Is this approved for merging? Or do we need to move it to a plugin?

Right now, neither. Please check this update and the conversations/comments that it links to.