test: [M3-7768] - Add VM Placement Group landing page empty state test

[jdamore-linode]

Description 📝

Adds a quick integration test to confirm the VM Placement Groups landing page empty state. The real purpose of this PR is to provide a bare minimum example showing how to mock one of our new object-based feature flags, but it's not much different from mocking our boolean flags.

Changes 🔄

• Add integration test to confirm VMPG landing page empty state
• Adds a mock util for Placement Group fetching

How to test 🧪

yarn cy:run -s "cypress/e2e/core/vmPlacement/vm-placement-landing-page.spec.ts"

As an Author I have considered 🤔

Check all that apply

• 👀 Doing a self review
• ❔ Our contribution guidelines
• 🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
• ➕ Adding a changeset
• 🧪 Providing/Improving test coverage
• 🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
• 🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
• 👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
• 📑 Providing or updating our documentation
• 🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
• 📱 Providing mobile support
• ♿ Providing accessibility support

[jdamore-linode]

The only real difference here is we're passing an object in the same shape as the feature flag rather than a true or false (however, there's no type safety here that'll catch us if we make a mistake).

[github-actions]

Coverage Report: ✅
Base Coverage: 81.79%
Current Coverage: 81.79%

[abailly-akamai]

Looks great! thanks for making this one, looking forward to writing more

[abailly-akamai]

@jdamore-linode since it's a generic we can add type safety here. We'll just have to remember to do it and catch it at code reviews if not present.

Pushed a fix for this one

[jdamore-linode]

Beautiful, wasn't aware of that Flags type. Thanks @abailly-akamai!

By the way, do you know anything about the vmPlacement LD flag? Was that a holdover from earlier in the project that isn't going to be used?

[abailly-akamai]

Correct, lemme delete it now so there's no confusion anymore

[carrillo-erik]

@jdamore-linode Looks good and thanks for getting this started. My only reservation is whether the folder and spect should be renamed to placementGroups/ and placement-group-landing-page.spec.ts. This change would reflect the feature and component names in the rest of the codebase.

[jdamore-linode]

My only reservation is whether the folder and spect should be renamed to placementGroups/ and placement-group-landing-page.spec.ts. This change would reflect the feature and component names in the rest of the codebase.

Great callout, thanks @carrillo-erik! If that's more consistent and makes more sense then I absolutely agree. I'll try to take care of that before I sign out tonight!