fix: remove the branch/version while building BS

[marslanabdulrauf]

Related Ticket

https://github.com/mitodl/hq/issues/9703 (MIT Internal)

Description

Its a small ripple affect from #37335

This pull request updates the logic in the build_block_structure function to ensure that block locations are consistently normalized by removing branch and version information. This change addresses issues when creating Block Structure from modulestore within published_only branch.

Useful information to include:

When creating BlockStructure within published_only branch context the "xblock being changed" contains branch and version info causing comparison issues in next flows to remove inaccessible blocks from the outline.

Testing instructions

Steps to reproduce

1. Create Course - Add section
2. Add two subsection with dummy units (text units)
3. Load the course for student -- You can see 1 Section and 2 subsections each with their own unit (navigation sidebar)
4. Now add future date to any of the unit
5. Reload the course page for student -- This block should be removed
6. Edit the date again and add past date now -- The sub-section should be visible but its not.

Testing

1. Now checkout to this branch
2. Repeat the steps from 4-6 and you should see the sub-section this time in the navigation sidebar.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @marslanabdulrauf!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-edx-platform.

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.

Details

---

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.

[pdpinch]

@ormsbee can you take a look at this fix up to #37335 ?

[ormsbee]

Code looks fine, and I appreciate the comments. Can you please add a test case for this that would have failed with the old code?

[ormsbee]

@pdpinch, @marslanabdulrauf: Should this also be backported to Ulmo?

[pdpinch]

Yes, it needs to be backported.

[ormsbee]

Due to CI shenanigans, it took all day before these tests ran, and the openedx/cla check is hanging. Given that I know @marslanabdulrauf is covered under the MIT entity agreement (which out of paranoia I've just re-verified in SalesForce), and that is the only non-passing check, I'm going to use my admin bits to merge this in now.