Fix issue with describing includes for child/parent pipelines

What does this MR do?

As discussed in the issue #205157 (closed), the current documentation gives the wrong impression that trigger supports all include parameters, but it doesn't. This corrects the page to remove that line and just point back to the current trigger keyword documentation.

Related issues

Relates to #205157 (closed)

Author's checklist (required)

• Follow the Documentation Guidelines and Style Guide.
• If you have developer access or higher (for example, GitLab team members or Core Team members)
  • Apply the documentation label, plus:
    • The corresponding DevOps stage and group label, if applicable.
    • development guidelines when changing docs under doc/development/*, CONTRIBUTING.md, or README.md.
    • development guidelines and Documentation guidelines when changing docs under development/documentation/*.
    • development guidelines and Description templates (.gitlab/*) when creating/updating issue and MR description templates.
  • Assign the designated Technical Writer.

Do not add the feature, frontend, backend, ~"bug", or database labels if you are only updating documentation. These labels will cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

When applicable:

• Update the permissions table.
• Link docs to and from the higher-level index page, plus other related docs where helpful.
• Add GitLab's version history note(s).
• Add the product tier badge.
• Add/update the feature flag section.
• If you're changing document headings, search doc/*, app/views/*, and ee/app/views/* for old headings replacing with the new ones to avoid broken anchors.

Review checklist

All reviewers can help ensure accuracy, clarity, completeness, and adherence to the Documentation Guidelines and Style Guide.

1. Primary Reviewer

• Review by a code reviewer or other selected colleague to confirm accuracy, clarity, and completeness. This can be skipped for minor fixes without substantive content changes.

2. Technical Writer

• Technical writer review. If not requested for this MR, must be scheduled post-merge. To request for this MR, assign the writer listed for the applicable DevOps stage.
  • Ensure Technical Writing, documentation, and a docs:: scoped label are added.
  • Add docs-only when the only files changed are under doc/*.
  • Add twdoing when starting work on the MR.
  • Add twfinished if Technical Writing team work on the MR is complete but it remains open.

3. Maintainer

1. Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the above reviews. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.
2. Ensure a release milestone is set.
3. If there has not been a technical writer review, create an issue for one using the Doc Review template.

changed milestone to %Backlog

added Category:Continuous Integration SLOMissed backend bridge pipelines candidate13.10 customer devopsverify grouppipeline execution priority2 severity2 typebug workflowplanning breakdown labels

removed priority2 severity2 labels

changed milestone to %13.3

removed candidate13.10 label

assigned to @marcel.amirault

assigned to @jyavorska and unassigned @marcel.amirault

mentioned in issue #205157 (closed)

removed typebug label

added documentation label

	1 Message
	This merge request adds or changes files that require a review from the Technical Writing team.

Documentation review

The following files require a review from a technical writer:

• doc/ci/parent_child_pipelines.md

The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:

• Technical Writers assignments for the appropriate technical writer for this review.
• Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.

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

Generated by Danger

added Technical Writing docsimprovement twdoing labels

resolved all threads

added 1 commit

• 83089f81 - Apply 1 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)

Compare with previous version

@jyavorska I see you assigned then unassigned me, I'm guessing this was a mistake? the changes here are good, so I'll approve and merge, let me know if that was ok!

approved this merge request

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 632c3b56 succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit c86db37e

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowplanning breakdown label

assigned to @marcel.amirault

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label

mentioned in merge request !43404 (merged)

This merge request has been deployed to the release.gitlab.net environment, and will be included in the upcoming self-managed GitLab 13.5.0 release.

---

This comment is generated automatically using the Release Tools project.

added published label

added typemaintenance label