[BLOCKED] Remove unused assets in content-build

[randimays]

Status

[2024-09-10] [Fran] Ticket blocking this one is In Progress. Will monitor and move to Ready when unblocked.
[2024-08-19] [Fran] Per Randi, this ticket is blocked; moved back to the backlog.
[2024-08-05] [Fran] In Ready column because every little bit of help Content build can get to optimize build time should be addressed, if possible.

Description

As tech debt cleanup, we should remove any media assets from content-build that are no longer used. This helps (marginally) with build time and discourages engineers from using these icons, and instead pushes them to use va-icon where possible for consistency.

Engineering notes / background

Folder with assets: https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/content-build/tree/main/src/site/assets/img

It is important to do a Github-wide search in the organization such as this example. Previously, when removing assets from vets-website, we ran into an issue where a team was pointing to the s3 bucket to retrieve assets (which were put there by VW). Slack context here: https://dsva.slack.com/archives/CBU0KDSB1/p1714066142850419.

You can check things at the folder level when doing the Github-wide search (i.e. img/design vs img/design/background/thread.png) to get through the searching more efficiently, and only drill down when necessary.

Acceptance criteria

• Github-wide search in the content-build repo for every asset removed (and confirm it's not being used)

[randimays]

This was pulled in as stretch for Sprint 10.

[randimays]

Jami from the design system reviewed the PR for this and I realized that the cross-repo style issue we have (with CB leaning on VW styles, #18765) should be fixed before we can confidently remove these assets. I did find at least one place where this would be a problem.

The PR is a WIP and has a do not merge label on it and is now dependent on #18765 in order to be merged/complete. I added that ticket as a blocker on this one, and marked this ticket as blocked.

@FranECross I think maybe this ticket should go back to the Backlog for now?

[FranECross]

@randimays Thanks so much for this info. Totally agree, and will scoot it back to the backlog.