[ARP POA Submission] (#5) Update POA Form Submission Scopes (#101919)#

[pixiitech]

Summary

• This work is behind a feature toggle (flipper): YES/NO yes

    Convert poa request status scopes/predicates
    
    This is so that these internal methods match status params in
    the index endpoint.
    
    - unprocessed -> pending
    - resolved -> processed
    
    They have also been modified to count requests with a PoA form
    submission in an unsuccessful state as pending.

• (If bug, how to reproduce) change
• (What is the solution, why is this the solution?) Oren Mittman slack request
• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?) ARF
• (If introducing a flipper, what is the success criteria being targeted?)

Related issue(s)

• Link to ticket created in va.gov-team repo OR screenshot of Jira ticket if your team uses Jira
• Link to previous change of the code/bug (if applicable)
• Link to epic if not included in ticket
• https://github.com/orgs/department-of-veterans-affairs/projects/1471/views/8?pane=issue&itemId=90415006&issue=department-of-veterans-affairs%7Cva.gov-team%7C98743

Testing done

• New code is covered by unit tests
• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change
• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected. Exclusively stating 'Specs run' is NOT acceptable as appropriate testing
• If this work is behind a flipper:
  • Tests need to be written for both the flipper on and flipper off scenarios. Docs.
  • What is the testing plan for rolling out the feature?

Screenshots

Note: Optional

What areas of the site does it impact?

(Describe what parts of the site are impacted andifcode touched other areas)

Acceptance criteria

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No error nor warning in the console.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog (if applicable)
• If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
• I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?

[github-actions]

Error: A file (or its parent directories) does not have a CODEOWNERS entry. Please update the .github/CODEOWNERS file and add the entry for the Offending file: spec/sidekiq/accredited_representative_portal/power_of_attorney_form_submission_job_spec.rb

[pixiitech]

.processed.where.not(resolution: { resolving_type: PowerOfAttorneyRequestExpiration.to_s })

adding .to_s here fixes the 'can't cast class' problem (and includes the namespace in the string)
@nihil2501

[nihil2501]

LGTM

[nihil2501]

LGTM