Remove bg- prefix from the state background

[rak-phillip]

Summary

This resolves a console error by removing the bg- prefix from the state background.

Fixes #16267

Occurred changes and/or fixed issues

Remove bg- prefix from the state background

Technical notes summary

It appears that the stateBackground is prefixed with a bg-

dashboard/shell/plugins/dashboard-store/resource-class.js

Lines 758 to 760 in bac4bc1

	get stateBackground() {
	return this.stateColor.replace('text-', 'bg-');
	}

While the status indicator expects no prefix:

dashboard/pkg/rancher-components/src/components/utils/status.ts

Lines 3 to 28 in bac4bc1

	export const StatusDefinitions = {
	info: {
	primary: '--rc-info',
	secondary: '--rc-info-secondary'
	},
	success: {
	primary: '--rc-success',
	secondary: '--rc-success-secondary'
	},
	warning: {
	primary: '--rc-warning',
	secondary: '--rc-warning-secondary'
	},
	error: {
	primary: '--rc-error',
	secondary: '--rc-error-secondary'
	},
	unknown: {
	primary: '--rc-unknown',
	secondary: '--rc-unknown-secondary'
	},
	none: {
	primary: '--rc-none',
	secondary: '--rc-none-secondary'
	},
	};

Areas or cases that should be tested

See issue - there should be no error printed to the browser console when navigating to a deployment detail page. The status indicator should be correct.

Areas which could experience regressions

Any valid status that contains bg- will have the matching string stripped.

Screenshot/Video

Checklist

• The PR is linked to an issue and the linked issue has a Milestone, or no issue is needed
• The PR has a Milestone
• The PR template has been filled out
• The PR has been self reviewed
• The PR has a reviewer assigned
• The PR has automated tests or clear instructions for manual tests and the linked issue has appropriate QA labels, or tests are not needed
• The PR has reviewed with UX and tested in light and dark mode, or there are no UX changes
• The PR has been reviewed in terms of Accessibility
• The PR has considered, and if applicable tested with, the three Global Roles Admin, Standard User and User Base

[eva-vashkevich]

I've noticed we use bg- in quite a few places in the code. Would it make more sense to rename statusDefinitions instead to avoid this happening in the future as we migrate more components?

[rak-phillip]

I've noticed we use bg- in quite a few places in the code. Would it make more sense to rename statusDefinitions instead to avoid this happening in the future as we migrate more components?

That's a good point. I'll defer to @codyrancher to see if he has any feedback on if we want to modify statusDefinitions, as he was the original author.

[codyrancher]

I'm not a big fan of adding the 'bg' prefix to the StatusDefinitions.

I see how it would make migrating easier but I'd prefer to make the new components as free from our legacy cruft as we can. I don't think it makes sense for a status definition to have any mention of background.

One alternative is to use the stateSimpleColor which should help bridge the gap from the old to the new.

[rak-phillip]

@eva-vashkevich @codyrancher this has been updated to utilize stateSimpleColor and is ready for another review.