Chore: Detecting password presence for users registered via social providers

[borkopetrovicc]

Description

Notion card: Detecting password presence for users registered via social providers

This PR solves # .

Steps completed:

According to our definition of done, I have completed the following steps:

• [ ] Acceptance criteria met
• [ ] Unit tests added
• [ ] Docs updated (including config and env variables)
• [ ] Translations added
• [ ] UX tested
• [ ] Browsers / platforms tested
• [ ] Rebased & ready to merge without conflicts
• [ ] Reviewed own code

[github-actions[bot]]

Visit the preview URL for this PR (updated for commit b3aa739):

https://ottwebapp--pr392-social-providers-pas-9bbd4dgc.web.app

_{(expires Fri, 15 Dec 2023 16:21:59 GMT)}

_{🔥 via Firebase Hosting GitHub Action 🌎}

_{Sign: c198f8a3a199ba8747819f7f1e45cf602b777529}

[borkopetrovicc]

LGTM!

• Have you run yarn i18next to extract all translations?
• Perhaps you can rebase/squash the commits to a single commit to make it cleaner. There are some faulty commit messages as well.

I have run yarn i18next. Good point for the commits. I will be more carefully for others pr-s.

[borkopetrovicc]

@ChristiaanScheermeijer I initially believed that you had already approved and commented 'LGTM'. Could we address these recent comments separately in another PR or ticket for improvements?

[kiremitrov123]

@ChristiaanScheermeijer I initially believed that you had already approved and commented 'LGTM'. Could we address these recent comments separately in another PR or ticket for improvements?

@borkopetrovicc the suggestions make sense to me and do not look like a lot of effort, so we better address them in this PR

[ChristiaanScheermeijer]

@ChristiaanScheermeijer I initially believed that you had already approved and commented 'LGTM'. Could we address these recent comments separately in another PR or ticket for improvements?

Yes, sorry for that. I indeed approved after a quick scan, but after a second review (and some new changes), I have found new improvement points.

The suggested changes will not affect the outcome but will improve the code quality and testability of components. The changes shouldn't take long, so I agree with @kiremitrov123 to include them in this PR. But that's up to you :-)

[naumovski-filip]

@ChristiaanScheermeijer @AntonLantukh Because @borkopetrovicc is on sick leave I've taken a look at the most recent comments and tried to fix them. Regarding the failing E2E tests, there are issues on Cleeng's side.