Update first-launch tutorial URL

[aidanbruneel]

Summary

Updates the browser extension's first-launch experience to point to the current IMAGE tutorial.

The accompanying first-launch documentation has also been updated so it no longer references the removed quickstart page.

Validation

• Checked for references to the obsolete quickstart URL remain under src/.
• Confirmed that both first-launch references use https://image.a11y.mcgill.ca/tutorial/.
• Ran git diff --check.
• Attempted npm run pack:test, but the build could not run on Unicorn because its installed Node.js 12 runtime is incompatible with the repository's current webpack toolchain.
  • This should probably be improved but that is way outside the scope of this work.

Closes #437.

[Miliya-Ai]

Question @aidanbruneel Have you deployed this branch to Unicorn? I'm trying to use the Incognito window to trigger the "first launch" logic and check if there are any requests sent to https://image.a11y.mcgill.ca/tutorial/, but I haven't observed that. However, the codebase seems fine, so I agree.

[aidanbruneel]

Hi @Miliya-Ai,

Thank you for actually testing the functionality, that's a great code review habit.

No, I haven't deployed or functionally tested this branch on Unicorn. I developed the change there, but Unicorn's Node.js version prevented the webpack development build from running, so my validation so far has only been source-level (as noted in the PR description). That said, browser extension isn't actually hosted on a server, it's hosted in your browser.

I also took another look at the first-launch logic. It appears that opening an Incognito window would not trigger it: the first-launch page is opened by runtime.onInstalled specifically when the installation reason is install. Additionally, the tutorial URL is an anchor in firstLaunch.html, so I wouldn't expect a request to the tutorial until the link itself is activated.

Honestly, I think the risk profile is so low, it probably isn't worth testing the actual functionality of the extension itself, since that is not the change that was requested; rather, I have changed the URL that the first-launch anchors to, so all else being equal, there is no reason this would disrupt that functionality.

[aidanbruneel]

As a side note if anyone ever reads this, this is one of the many reasons why unit testing (and specifically, Mocking) is useful.

[Miliya-Ai]

@aidanbruneel Thanks for the detailed explanation, that clarifies things.
Good point on the extension not being server-hosted — makes sense that the Unicorn/Node version issue isn't actually a blocker for functional testing here, since it just runs directly in the browser.
And thanks for digging into the onInstalled behavior — that answers my question about Incognito not triggering it. I agree the risk here is low since the trigger logic itself wasn't touched, only the URL. I'm fine with skipping a full uninstall/reinstall test for this one, given the scope of the change.