Improve error message for model registration

[ppadti]

Closes: RHOAIENG-13908

Description

This PR aims to improve error messages for model registration as mentioned in this doc

In Register model page:

1. Model failed to create:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-03.at.8.24.30.PM.mov

2. Model created but Version failed to create:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-03.at.8.56.51.PM.mov

3. Model and version created but artifact failed to create:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-03.at.8.57.32.PM.mov

In Register new version page:

1. Version failed to create:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-03.at.8.11.59.PM.mov

2. Version created but artifact failed to create:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-03.at.8.12.38.PM.mov

How Has This Been Tested?

Its bit difficult to test as we fixed long name error here.

To test all these states mentioned in this doc locally

• Try duplicate name while creating model/ version to get failed model/ version error
• revert this commit to see version failure error
• To get artifact failure error, modify this line to long name.

Test Impact

NA, Already covered by other PR and few cases can not be reproduced.

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

• The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
• Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
• The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit or cypress tests for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

• Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
• Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change.

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

• The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

[ppadti]

@yih-wang could you please take a look at the screen recordings?
Also, I have a question. when we have two alert to display, should both of them have action to close separately or only one with error alert (like below image). I am not sure what should be the expected behaviour here. Could you please provide your suggestion for this.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 52.94118% with 48 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 85.47%. Comparing base (70e0d4e) to head (caa0381).
Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...stry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterModelErrors.tsx	3.84%	25 Missing ⚠️
...pages/modelRegistry/screens/RegisterModel/utils.ts	66.66%	9 Missing ⚠️
...elRegistry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterModel.tsx	65.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
...Registry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterVersion.tsx	66.66%	6 Missing ⚠️
...y/screens/RegisterModel/RegistrationFormFooter.tsx	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3534      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.56%   85.47%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files        1372     1372              
  Lines       31211    31277      +66     
  Branches     8741     8761      +20     
==========================================
+ Hits        26705    26735      +30     
- Misses       4506     4542      +36     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...pages/modelRegistry/screens/RegisterModel/const.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...y/screens/RegisterModel/RegistrationFormFooter.tsx	92.85% <75.00%> (+8.24%)	⬆️
...Registry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterVersion.tsx	78.72% <66.66%> (-9.52%)	⬇️
...elRegistry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterModel.tsx	80.55% <65.00%> (-19.45%)	⬇️
...pages/modelRegistry/screens/RegisterModel/utils.ts	80.43% <66.66%> (-16.24%)	⬇️
...stry/screens/RegisterModel/RegisterModelErrors.tsx	3.84% <3.84%> (ø)

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 70e0d4e...caa0381. Read the comment docs.

[yih-wang]

@ppadti the videos look good, thank you!
Regarding your question of whether to include the close buttons - I've consulted @angesDing about how to align them with our new validation guidelines - the short answer is the error alert shouldn't include the close button, and the success alert should include it.

[ppadti]

@yih-wang I have updated the screen recordings, please take a look at them when you have a moment.

[yih-wang]

Thanks for the updates @ppadti! We discussed yesterday the issue where the name in the alert will change after the name in the form. Haven't seen that behavior in the videos. Has it been addressed?

[ppadti]

Thanks for the updates @ppadti! We discussed yesterday the issue where the name in the alert will change after the name in the form. Haven't seen that behavior in the videos. Has it been addressed?

yes, If you look at the first recording (model failed to create), you can see that behaviour there. Also attaching another recording for that here:

Screen.Recording.2024-12-04.at.4.55.08.PM.mov

[yih-wang]

@ppadti Ah yes, I see it now! It works well so I missed it... All look good to me!

[mturley]

@ppadti this LGTM, just needs rebase and conflicts resolved.

[manaswinidas]

/lgtm

[mturley]

Thanks @ppadti

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: manaswinidas, mturley

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• frontend/OWNERS [mturley]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment