Implement Vetting Workflow

[naglepuff]

About this Pull Request

This pull request's base branch is vetting-workflow. That base branch will be the target for vetting-related PRs until it makes sense to merge the entire feature into the main branch.

Changes

Fix #277

This PR adds vetting-related settings and enables users to make file-level annotations as "submitted" (one per file). This is to support vetting workflows, such as the round of community vetting of data that will take place in early 2026.

Issue #277's requirements are all met by this PR:

Add a Mark Complete / Submit action for the current user on the current file.

This is done at the annotation level. When the mark_annotations_completed_enabled setting is turned on, the file annotation editor contains a new button called "Submit." Clicking this button will make that annotation as submitted. Each user can submit up to one annotation per recording. Once an annotation is submitted, it cannot be unsubmitted, and no other annotations can be submitted for that recording.

After marking complete, the reviewer should still be able to reopen the file (for comparison), but it remains clearly marked complete.

Nothing in the PR filters recordings based on whether or not the current user has submitted an annotation for the recordings. That can be relegated to future work. For now, a new column has been added to the recordings view that indicates with a checkmark or cancel icon whether or not a user has submitted an annotation for that recording. This is only visible when the mark_annotations_completed_enabled setting is turned on.

Store per-user per-file completion state: Not Completed vs Completed.

This can be determined simply by filtering for a given user and submitted flag on a recording's associated file annotations.

TODO

• Indicate which files are reviewed (have submitted applications) in sidebar view
• Add screenshots

[naglepuff]

@BryonLewis FYI I plan to do vetting work in a base feature branch. I'll do my best to break it into reasonable chunks, which will all be merged into vetting-workflow before the entire thing is merged into main. This way we don't have an incomplete set of vetting tools in main, but changes can be reviewed in smaller PRs.