Refactor trial parameter concerns in saas onboarding

What does this MR do and why?

Refactor some parameter concerns in saas onboarding.

• some tuning around wether to pass/show trial param.
• switch from only passing if true to only passing if it was passed and had value

Trial param

1. trial exist and is true if the user registers through trial_registrations/new path. Otherwise the parameter will not exist(yet). trial_registrations/new is only available on SaaS.
2. User is redirected to the WelcomeController#show.

old way to pass the trial param to company controller

1. ee/app/views/registrations/welcome/_setup_for_company.html.haml partial that is part of the WelcomeController#show form submission adds a hidden field of trial that will always be submitted(even if no trial param passed to the show action.
2. If the user is directed to the company controller next, this trial param is passed, only if it is true.

new way to pass the trial param to company controller

1. The WelcomeController#show form submission now has the param added on the submission URL for the update only if trial exists in the params and has value.
2. If the user is directed to the company controller next, this trial param is passed.

How to set up and validate locally

All variations of this can be validated by the feature specs in ee/spec/features/registrations/saas

MR acceptance checklist

This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

• I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.

Related to #422074 (closed)

changed milestone to %16.1

added Next Up bugfunctional devopsgrowth groupacquisition sectiongrowth typebug workflowin dev labels

assigned to @dstull

added backend frontend labels

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	Hitesh Raghuvanshi (@hraghuvanshi) (UTC+5.5, 9.5 hours ahead of @dstull)	Drew Blessing (@dblessing) (UTC-5, 1 hour behind @dstull)
frontend	Ankit Panchal (@ankit.panchal) (UTC+5.5, 9.5 hours ahead of @dstull)	Payton Burdette (@pburdette) (UTC-4, same timezone as @dstull)

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

added 1 commit

• 36883ba0 - Refactor some parameter concerns in saas onboarding

Compare with previous version

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

e2e-test-on-gdk: test report for ce4d71c5

expand test summary

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                          suites summary                          |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|             | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Plan        | 47     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 47    | ✅     |
| Govern      | 34     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 34    | ✅     |
| Create      | 38     | 0      | 0       | 2     | 38    | ❗     |
| Data Stores | 20     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 20    | ✅     |
| Manage      | 12     | 0      | 1       | 1     | 13    | ❗     |
| Verify      | 8      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 8     | ✅     |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total       | 159    | 0      | 1       | 3     | 160   | ❗     |
+-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

changed milestone to %16.2

added missed:16.1 label

changed milestone to %16.3

added missed:16.2 label

changed the description

added 11819 commits

• 36883ba0...b8949330 - 11818 commits from branch master
• 48f29579 - Refactor some parameter concerns in saas onboarding

Compare with previous version

@dstull Some end-to-end (E2E) tests should run based on the stage label.

Please start the trigger-omnibus-and-follow-up-e2e job in the qa stage and ensure tests in the follow-up-e2e:package-and-test-ee pipeline pass before this MR is merged. (E2E tests are computationally intensive and don't run automatically for every push/rebase, so we ask you to run this job manually at least once.)

To run all E2E tests, apply the pipeline:run-all-e2e label and run a new pipeline.

E2E test jobs are allowed to fail due to flakiness. See current failures at the latest pipeline triage issue.

Once done, apply the emoji on this comment.

For any questions or help, reach out on the internal #quality Slack channel.

added 1 commit

• ce4d71c5 - Refactor some parameter concerns in saas onboarding

Compare with previous version

marked this merge request as ready

marked the checklist item I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR. as completed

changed the description

changed the description

@syarynovskyi can you please review backend? I don't think this warrants a frontend review.

requested review from @syarynovskyi

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

added maintenancerefactor typemaintenance labels and removed typebug label

removed bugfunctional label

removed missed:16.1 label

removed missed:16.2 label

changed title from Refactor some parameter concerns in saas onboarding to Refactor trial parameter concerns in saas onboarding

approved this merge request

@syarynovskyi, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

• rspec predictive jobs
• jest predictive jobs
• merging a merge request.

added pipeline:mr-approved label

requested review from @tkuah and removed review request for @syarynovskyi

approved this merge request

resolved all threads

LGTM, thanks for the clear and easy to follow MR description @dstull

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 72ea373e succeeds

merged

@tkuah, did you forget to run a pipeline before you merged this work? Based on our code review process, if the latest pipeline was created more than 6 hours ago OR finished more than 2 hours ago, you should:

1. Ensure the merge request is not in Draft status.
2. Start a pipeline (especially important for Community contribution merge requests).
3. Set the merge request to auto-merge.

This is a guideline, not a rule. Please consider replying to this comment for transparency.

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

mentioned in commit 7bd07f52

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label

added releasedcandidate label

added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label