Added Nag Dialog for Prisoners of War Outside of Contracts

[IllianiCBT]

Current Implementation

None

Problem

I am definitely not the only person who has done this: end the contract, enjoy the spoils of war, get halfway to Galatea only to remember you have a couple hundred prisoners of war still hanging about. You're not about to return to the contract planet so you just dump them out into space. Everyone is sad.

Solution

On a new day, if not on a contract, the system will check whether any of the users' active personnel are prisoners. If any prisoners are found the nag dialog is triggered.

Update

I removed the check for Bondsmen, as these can still be assigned to roles they don't really have the same issue as Prisoners.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 19 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 10.65%. Comparing base (2676968) to head (cf0e4c9).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ekhq/gui/dialog/nagDialogs/PrisonersNagDialog.java	0.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/dialog/MHQOptionsDialog.java	0.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
MekHQ/src/mekhq/gui/CampaignGUI.java	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #3942      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     10.65%   10.65%   -0.01%     
  Complexity     5528     5528              
============================================
  Files           836      837       +1     
  Lines        114275   114294      +19     
  Branches      17185    17188       +3     
============================================
  Hits          12176    12176              
- Misses       100871   100890      +19     
  Partials       1228     1228              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[AaronGullickson]

One thing to keep in mind is that people use MekHQ for all kinds of things not just AtB, so we should be careful about assuming purpose and intent of having prisoners. I don't love having this nag if I want to keep prisoners for some reason, but I suppose it can be dismissed easily enough.

[IllianiCBT]

One thing to keep in mind is that people use MekHQ for all kinds of things not just AtB, so we should be careful about assuming purpose and intent of having prisoners. I don't love having this nag if I want to keep prisoners for some reason, but I suppose it can be dismissed easily enough.

Valid point. My thinking is that, in instances where users want to keep their prisoners, the nag is easy to suppress and re-enable at a later date. Much like unmaintained units.

[AaronGullickson]

Yeah, that's fine. If you can just clear the other excess parenthesis, I can approve and merge.

[IllianiCBT]

Yeah, that's fine. If you can just clear the other excess parenthesis, I can approve and merge.

Done (assuming there wasn't others). I also changed hasPrisoners() to private, as there was no reason for it to be public.