feat: add asset existence check before replacing static URLs

[bra-i-am]

Description

This merge request solves an issue where the save warning is shown without making changes to new courses. Additionally, it also adds an existence check before replacing the static URLs

Supporting information

#1265

Testing instructions

1. Mount this MFE in a Tutor environment and git switch to this branch
2. Enable contentstore.new_studio_mfe.use_new_schedule_details_page
3. Create course in Studio
4. Open Settings -> Schedule & details
5. Once you enter this page, you shouldn't watch the warning popover to jump out as you just made a change
6. Additionally, in the Course overview it must be displayed the default images if the assets are not found

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @bra-i-am!

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

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.

---

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 94.08%. Comparing base (ea33c15) to head (3d2b3dd).
Report is 20 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1708      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.03%   94.08%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1163     1165       +2     
  Lines       24429    24470      +41     
  Branches     5316     5302      -14     
==========================================
+ Hits        22972    23023      +51     
+ Misses       1380     1370      -10     
  Partials       77       77              

☔ 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.

[arbrandes]

I think this is a reasonable approach to fix #1265. Thank you! I would like for it to use react-query, though, if at all possible.

[bra-i-am]

@arbrandes, I have already addressed your comment and modified the code to implement the fix using react-query.

I'm looking forward to your feedback! Thanks ✨

[arbrandes]

Thanks, @bra-i-am! I'm putting this back on my queue. I'll try to get to it before the conference, but it's possible I'll only be able to review or on after July 7th.

[mariajgrimaldi]

@bra-i-am: can you help us fix the branch conflicts? Thanks!