feat(uve): Add validation of FF TOGGLE_LOCK on different pageViews

[KevinDavilaDotCMS]

2026-05-19.11-59-42.mov

Screenshots

Original	Updated
** original screenshot **	** updated screenshot **

This PR fixes: #35743

[claude]

Claude finished @KevinDavilaDotCMS's task in 1m 23s —— View job

---

Review

The fix is correct: early-returning false from $showLockOverlay when viewMode !== UVE_MODE.EDIT (edit-ema-editor.component.ts:356-359) correctly suppresses the overlay in PREVIEW, LIVE, and UNKNOWN modes, which is the bug from #35743. The lock UI only makes sense in EDIT — gating at the computed level (vs. in the template) keeps the logic centralized. Two human approvals already.

A few observations worth a second look — none blocking:

• Spec coverage is narrow. The new test (edit-ema-editor.component.spec.ts:881-892) only validates UVE_MODE.PREVIEW with the feature flag disabled. The new branch also affects LIVE and UNKNOWN, and the more dangerous regression — feature flag enabled + page not locked — would have returned true under the old logic. An it.each([PREVIEW, LIVE, UNKNOWN]) paired with both flag states would have been a tighter regression net for the same line count.

• Flag in the new test is irrelevant noise. flags: { FEATURE_FLAG_UVE_TOGGLE_LOCK: false } at line 887 has no effect because the early-return at line 357 short-circuits before the flag is read. Either drop it or flip it to true to also exercise the enabled-path regression (which is what the issue title actually calls out).

• Test placement. The new it sits between the lockedByAnotherUser mock declaration and the with feature flag enabled describe. Moving it under its own describe('when view mode is not EDIT', ...) would group the non-EDIT cases and read more clearly alongside the existing flag-on / flag-off branches.

• Lint-fix commit is import-order churn. be5ab1a8 reverts the import order back to what b4a25dc0 already had after the rebase — cosmetic, fine to leave, just noting it shows up in the history.

• Defensive ... ?? {} on pageParams. ...(store.pageParams() ?? {}) at line 884 is defensive against an undefined pageParams that the default test setup (line 490) already populates with mode: UVE_MODE.EDIT. Not wrong, just unnecessary.

No security, correctness, or design concerns. Clean to merge.
• Branch