Unify true-false validation specs II

What does this MR do and why?

Unify true-false validation specs II

This is a follow-up MR from: !124719 (merged)

After ensuring our changes to one file were correct, I moved forward with the remaining files with that syntax.

Next steps: document this preference in the documentation

Screenshots or screen recordings

How to set up and validate locally

Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.

1. Install the GDK project
2. Fetch changes from the main branch
3. Run tests to make sure changes are running

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.

Hey @anaschwendler! 👋

Thank you for your contribution to GitLab. Please refer to the contribution documentation for an overview of the process.

When you're ready for a first review, post @gitlab-bot ready. If you know a relevant reviewer(s) (for example, someone that was involved in a related issue), you can also assign them directly with @gitlab-bot ready @user1 @user2.

At any time, if you need help, feel free to post @gitlab-bot help or initiate a mentor session on Discord. Read more on how to get help.

You can comment @gitlab-bot label <label1> <label2> to add labels to your MR. Please see the list of allowed labels in the label command documentation.

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

added Community contribution workflowin dev labels

assigned to @anaschwendler

Hey @jessieay! 👋

This is my follow-up MR regarding unifying true-false validation specs. In the previous MR, you mentioned documenting this preference. Can you point me out where I can do that?

Also, would you review this MR as well?

Thanks in advance! Have a nice week!

	5 Warnings
⚠	e8452ddb: The commit body should not contain more than 72 characters per line. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.
⚠	This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone.
⚠	Please add a merge request subtype to this merge request.
⚠	Please add a merge request type to this merge request.
⚠	This Merge Request needs to be labelled with backend. Please request a reviewer or maintainer to add them.

	1 Message
📖	CHANGELOG missing: If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab FOSS, add the Changelog trailer to the commit message you want to add to the changelog. If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab EE, also add the EE: true trailer to your commit message. If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.

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	Eduardo Bonet (@eduardobonet) (UTC+2)	Bob Van Landuyt (@reprazent) (UTC+2)

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

requested review from @jessieay

approved this merge request

👋 @jessieay, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, please start a new pipeline before merging.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

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

added pipeline:mr-approved label

added typemaintenance label

added maintenancerefactor label

added backend label

changed milestone to %16.2

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for df9c56cd succeeds

	1 Warning
⚠	e8452ddb: The commit body should not contain more than 72 characters per line. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.

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	Eduardo Bonet (@eduardobonet) (UTC+2)	Bob Van Landuyt (@reprazent) (UTC+2)

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

merged

@anaschwendler, how was your code review experience with this merge request? Please tell us how we can continue to iterate and improve:

1. React with a 👍 or a 👎 on this comment to describe your experience.
2. Create a new comment starting with @gitlab-bot feedback below, and leave any additional feedback you have for us in the comment.

Interested in learning more tips and tricks to solve your next challenge faster? Subscribe to the GitLab Community Newsletter for contributor-focused content and opportunities to level up.

Thanks for your help! ❤

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

mentioned in commit 43952fdc

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin dev label