Ensure tabs are not created in hidden window and correct window is focused

[petemill]

Fix #13859
Fix #13860
Fix #13865

Makes sure tabs are created in a shown window, or creates a new window, that the window is focused, and if the shown window is minimized, then that window is restored.

Fixes for the following scenarios...

• There are no windows open
• There are only minimized windows open

...with the following actions:

• Brave is default browser and link clicked in another application
• macOS dock icon is clicked
• 'Brave' menu actions such as 'New Tab' or 'About Brave'

About the code

• Replaces custom code in cmdLine.js with store action: notably the feature of CREATE_TAB_REQUESTED which will create a window for the tab if it does not exist. That was introduced recently for a very similar issue (with menu items) in Menu items which need a window will create / show one if needed #13749.
• Introduces new similar action (FOCUS_OR_CREATE_MENU) for when we want to focus any existing window, or create a new one if it does not exist (when the macOS dock icon is clicked and the app receives the activate event).
• Fixes the window api getActiveWindow to return a minimized window if there are no un-minimized windows. The risk here should be minimal since this api method is only used by these two actions (menu items, cli URLs, and URLs from external applications).

Test plan:

Browser must be set as default. If testing from source, the best way is to create a build CHANNEL=dev npm run build-package, run that, and set it as default.

• Click URL link in external application and ensure that tab opens in an active window, and the window is focused with the following scenarios:
  - 1 window open
  - 2+ windows open
  - 0 windows open
  - 1 minimized window open
  - 1 minimized window open and 1 non-minimized window open
  - Application exited
• macOS: click dock icon, ensure window is focused or created:
  - 1 window open
  - 2+ windows open
  - 0 windows open
  - 1 minimized window open
  - 1 minimized window open and 1 non-minimized

Even though the reported issues were macOS only, this test plan should be carried out on other platforms to ensure no regressions.

Submitter Checklist:

• Submitted a ticket for my issue if one did not already exist.
• Used Github auto-closing keywords in the commit message.
• Added/updated tests for this change (for new code or code which already has tests).
• Ran git rebase -i to squash commits (if needed).
• Tagged reviewers and labelled the pull request as needed.
• Request a security/privacy review as needed. (Ask a Brave employee to help if you cannot access this document.)

Reviewer Checklist:

• Request a security/privacy review as needed if one was not already requested.

Tests

• Adequate test coverage exists to prevent regressions
• Tests should be independent and work correctly when run individually or as a suite ref
• New files have MPL2 license header

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #13866 into master will decrease coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is 2.5%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #13866      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.63%   56.56%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         283      283              
  Lines       28848    28885      +37     
  Branches     4784     4786       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits        16338    16339       +1     
- Misses      12510    12546      +36

Flag	Coverage Δ
#unittest	56.56% <2.5%> (-0.07%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
js/constants/appConstants.js	100% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
app/cmdLine.js	39.47% <0%> (-1.65%)	⬇️
js/actions/appActions.js	19.03% <0%> (-0.11%)	⬇️
app/browser/windows.js	32.58% <0%> (-0.86%)	⬇️
app/common/commonMenu.js	54% <0%> (ø)	⬆️
app/browser/reducers/tabsReducer.js	37.56% <0%> (-0.5%)	⬇️
app/browser/reducers/windowsReducer.js	77.39% <11.11%> (-2.14%)	⬇️

[NejcZdovc]

++ test plan is working and code looks good to me

[NejcZdovc]

master 622ef4b
0.23 6346017
0.22 48d809e

@petemill I didn't merge into 0.22.x-c66 because there is a conflict and it looks like that some code doesn't exists that was added here #13749 which is targeted for 0.22 v3. What should we do here? Push it back into v3 or will work correctly without this PR?

[petemill]

Thanks for the merge @NejcZdovc. #13749 will be uplifted to 0.22.x-c66 along with this one. I can do those cherry-picks for that branch.

[petemill]

0.22.x-c66 1339f92