chore(frontend): remove the unused DatasetVersionFileTreeManager

[aglinxinyuan]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Deletes DatasetVersionFileTreeManager, which builds a client-side hash map of dataset file paths that nothing in production constructs. Pure deletion, no behaviour change: −287 lines.

History

Introduced by	#2413 (2024-02-26) — "Introduce Dataset GUI"
Usage removed by	#3296 (2025-03-10) — "Add FileService as a standalone microservice, LakeFS+S3 as dataset storage" deleted the real usages from files-uploader.component.ts (previouslyUploadFilesManager, newUploadFileTreeManager) once LakeFS began serving the file tree. The leftover dangling import was swept away by #3848 (2025-10-11, the org.apache rename)

Dead for about a year and a half.

Reviewer note: the rest of datasetVersionFileTree.ts stays — DatasetFileNode and getFullPathFromDatasetFileNode have live consumers, and the spec keeps its coverage of both. Only the class and its own describe block are removed.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #8462

How was this PR tested?

Existing tests only — this PR removes a class and the spec block that covered it.

From frontend/:

• npx ng test --watch=false --include='**/datasetVersionFileTree.spec.ts' — 10 tests pass (the surviving DatasetFileNode / getFullPathFromDatasetFileNode coverage).
• yarn --cwd frontend format:ci — clean.

Verification, re-runnable by a reviewer:

git grep -n DatasetVersionFileTreeManager        # only the deleted class and its tests
git grep -n getFullPathFromDatasetFileNode       # the live sibling, untouched

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

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5)

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

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

• Contributors with relevant context: @tanishqgandhi1908
  You can notify them by mentioning @tanishqgandhi1908 in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.94%. Comparing base (bda3400) to head (c24e47b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #8464   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     93.94%   93.94%           
  Complexity     4826     4826           
=========================================
  Files          1209     1209           
  Lines         49705    49642   -63     
  Branches       6074     6056   -18     
=========================================
- Hits          46694    46638   -56     
+ Misses         1522     1521    -1     
+ Partials       1489     1483    -6     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	80.18% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
agent-service	99.32% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
amber	89.91% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
computing-unit-managing-service	75.05% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
config-service	87.12% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
file-service	83.65% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
frontend	96.79% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
notebook-migration-service	83.73% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
pyamber	98.47% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400
workflow-compiling-service	77.19% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from bda3400

*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.