UIOR-1530 Fix payment terms accordion error state

[usavkov-epam]

Purpose

Follow-up bug fixes for the Payment Terms form introduced in
UIOR-1530.

• https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIOR-1530?focusedCommentId=317406
• https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIOR-1530?focusedCommentId=317491

• Make the Amount the default distribution type;
• When activating the "Multi-year payments" checkbox, set "Total price" values based on calculated amount;
• Keep fund distribution fields editable for non-pending order status;
• False error indicator on the Payment Terms accordion — while async fund-distribution validation was in flight, omitFieldArraysAsyncErrors correctly stripped the pending Promise from paymentTerms.fiscalYearDistributions, but left the now-empty paymentTerms: {} object in the errors map. useErrorAccordionStatus iterates Object.keys(errors) and treats that empty object as a real error, keeping the accordion in the error state indefinitely.

Approach

Accordion false error state

Extended omitFieldArraysAsyncErrors to walk up the ancestor chain after
unsetting a nested path and remove any objects that are now empty. This ensures
{ paymentTerms: {} } is cleaned up alongside
paymentTerms.fiscalYearDistributions during the async-pending window. The
walk stops as soon as a non-empty ancestor is found, so real sibling errors
(e.g. paymentTerms.totalPrice) are preserved.

The function was also refactored into named, single-responsibility helpers
(hasPendingArrayError, hasResolvedItemErrors, isEmptyObject,
pruneEmptyAncestors) to make the logic easier to follow and test.

POLineForm was updated to use the useFormState() hook instead of
form.getState()?.errors so that the error map re-renders reactively
whenever final-form state changes.

Pre-Merge Checklist

• I've added appropriate record to the CHANGELOG.md
• Does this PR meet or exceed the expected quality standards?
  • Code coverage on new code is 80% or greater
  • Duplications on new code is 3% or less
  • There are no major code smells or security issues
• Does this introduce breaking changes?
  • There are no breaking changes in this PR.

[github-actions]

Jest Unit Test Results

    1 files  ± 0    307 suites  ±0   7m 4s ⏱️ -3s
1 134 tests +11  1 126 ✅ +11  8 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
1 142 runs  +11  1 134 ✅ +11  8 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 7113e04. ± Comparison against base commit 5fdaf1d.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
97.3% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud