refactor(python-notebook-migration): key the notebook mapping to the workflow's own version instead of a hardcoded vid=1

[zyratlo]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

This PR resolves the real version ID of a workflow instead of the constant, and makes the fetch version-agnostic so a mapping keeps reattaching after the workflow's version advances. notebook.wid is UNIQUE (one notebook per workflow) and the fetch join is on wid + nid, so keying on wid alone is sufficient and correct.

NotebookMigrationResource (store resolves the version, fetch drops the vid filter)

• Store no longer reads a vid from the request. It resolves the mapping's vid server-side as MAX(workflow_version.vid) for the wid, anchoring the mapping to the workflow's own latest version rather than a client-supplied value. If the workflow has no version to anchor to, it returns a 400 before any insert instead of a 500 from the FK.
• Fetch no longer reads a vid or filters the query by it, so the stored mapping still resolves after the workflow advances to a newer version.
• Adds a future-work note at the fetch query: supporting one notebook per workflow version would mean dropping the notebook.wid UNIQUE constraint and re-adding a vid filter (falling back to the latest), since without it a multi-notebook workflow would silently return only the newest.

NotebookMigrationService (frontend store)

• storeNotebookAndMapping drops its vid parameter and stops sending vid in the request body. The version is now resolved by the backend.

JupyterPanelService (frontend fetch)

• fetchNotebookAndMapping drops its vId parameter and the vid field from the request body, along with the stale "Future work: add dynamic fetching of current workflow vId" comment. The panel reattaches by wid.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #7636
Parent issue #4301

How was this PR tested?

Added tests in

• NotebookMigrationResourceSpec.scala
• notebook-migration.service.spec.ts
• jupyter-panel.service.spec.ts

Also manually verified on local development environment.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• No candidates found from git blame history.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.20%. Comparing base (ee06e4b) to head (ebf3bc9).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7791      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     91.22%   91.20%   -0.02%     
+ Complexity     4471     4468       -3     
============================================
  Files          1171     1171              
  Lines         47183    47163      -20     
  Branches       5307     5302       -5     
============================================
- Hits          43042    43015      -27     
- Misses         2464     2474      +10     
+ Partials       1677     1674       -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	81.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	98.62% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 2d60462
amber	87.93% <ø> (-0.08%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 2d60462
computing-unit-managing-service	73.67% <ø> (ø)
config-service	86.73% <ø> (ø)
file-service	68.90% <ø> (ø)
frontend	92.66% <100.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
notebook-migration-service	79.13% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
pyamber	97.57% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 2d60462
workflow-compiling-service	77.19% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[zyratlo]

This PR also folds in a small unrelated cleanup effabc3: it removes the dead JupyterPanelService.openPanel. mengw15 flagged it (#7741 (review)). The method lost its only production caller when #7571 removed the toolbar import branch, and its comment still described that flow, which no longer exists. Since this PR already touches jupyter-panel.service.ts, it was a convenient place to land the cleanup. The jupyterNotebookExists toolbar signal is still set on the normal path in init(), so no behavior is lost.

[zyratlo]

/request-review @mengw15

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Fixes notebook mappings to use each workflow’s actual latest version while allowing reattachment after version changes.

Changes:

• Resolves vid server-side during storage.
• Fetches mappings by workflow ID without version filtering.
• Updates frontend payloads and regression tests.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
NotebookMigrationResource.scala	Resolves latest workflow version and makes fetch version-agnostic.
NotebookMigrationResourceSpec.scala	Tests version resolution and reattachment behavior.
notebook-migration.service.ts	Removes vid from storage requests.
notebook-migration.service.spec.ts	Verifies version-free storage payloads.
jupyter-panel.service.ts	Removes vid from fetch requests and unused panel helper.
jupyter-panel.service.spec.ts	Updates fetch tests and removes obsolete helper tests.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[mengw15]

LGTM