docs: update the README with dev docs

[tecoholic]

Updates the placeholders in the README.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @tecoholic!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/committers-frontend.

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.

[farhaanbukhsh]

@tecoholic Can you please fix the CI here, i think after that we are good to go. Thanks a lot for working on this.

[farhaanbukhsh]

@tecoholic I have added few comments

[farhaanbukhsh]

Suggested change

	tutor enable aspects
	tutor plugin enable aspects

[farhaanbukhsh]

and we should also add tutor config save --set ASPECTS_ENABLE_STUDIO_IN_CONTEXT_METRICS=True

[farhaanbukhsh]

Do we really required to build openedx?

[tecoholic]

@farhaanbukhsh The tutor-contrib-aspects README has it under Rebuild Docker Images:, which I think comes from this openedx-dev image patch that does pip install.

[farhaanbukhsh]

Maybe adding https://github.com/openedx/frontend-app-authoring?tab=readme-ov-file#startup here will make the setup simpler

[tecoholic]

@farhaanbukhsh I thought about doing it. But I find it hard to switch repo READMEs and modify the just a couple of commands. I end up missing the order of the commands and having to redo it. So, I thought I will document everything here in order, so we can just follow a single readme.

[tecoholic]

@farhaanbukhsh The CI initially failed at npm ci as we are using npm install --legacy-peer-deps. Once I changed that, now the eslint rules are failing - logs here. While I can work on getting that sorted out, it diverges from the purpose of this PR.

It would be better to fix the CI and also update the dependencies to match the versions in authoring MFE, so we can drop the --legacy-peer-deps and make it cleaner, in a separate PR.

[farhaanbukhsh]

Suggested change

	npm install ./frontend-plugin-aspects --legacy-peer-deps
	npm install ./frontend-plugin-aspects

[tecoholic]

@farhaanbukhsh Updated 👍

[saraburns1]

@tecoholic once you merge in my change, see if you can put the --legacy-peer-deps back and check that it still works

[tecoholic]

@saraburns1 Thanks a lot for the quick fix. We are intentionally trying to get rid of the --legacy-peer-deps. So, if the CI passes now, we should be good.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 48.50%. Comparing base (b628db3) to head (136faad).
⚠️ Report is 30 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #46       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   16.61%   48.50%   +31.88%     
===========================================
  Files          15       15               
  Lines         331      334        +3     
  Branches       65       65               
===========================================
+ Hits           55      162      +107     
+ Misses        265      171       -94     
+ Partials       11        1       -10     

☔ 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.

[farhaanbukhsh]

@tecoholic just one more change and we should be good to merge this.

[tecoholic]

@farhaanbukhsh I have applied the change you suggested. However, the CI is failing due to renovate-bot's auto updated of react-query.

[farhaanbukhsh]

👍

• ✅ I tested this by reading through it and following the instructions
• ✅ I read through the code
• ❌ I checked for accessibility issues
• ✅ Includes documentation

[farhaanbukhsh]

@tecoholic thank you so much for the amazing job at the documentation.