Disable user cap input if shared externally

What does this MR do and why?

This MR disables the Group user cap setting input when the group or one of it's descendants are shared externally (outside of it's hierarchy).

This satisfies the requirements stipulated in #342227 (closed) and the discussion here

We already prevent sharing externally if the user cap is enabled, this MR covers the usecase where they have already been shared.

TLDR; a user cap is not useful when a group has been shared externally because the owner has no control over billable members being added to the groups it was shared to.

How to set up and validate locally

1. Ensure the feature is available locally:

     Feature.enable(:saas_user_caps)

2. Modify Gitlab.com? to return true (you may need to restart your GDK instance for this to take effect)
3. Check the settings for a root group and view the user cap input (http://host/groups/your-group/-/edit > Permissions and group features)
4. Invite another root group into the root group's (or one of it's subgroups) hierarchy (http://host/groups/your-group/-/group_members > Invite group)
5. View the settings again and they should not be available to edit
6. View the same settings for a sub-group to confirm user cap input is not visible

enabled	disabled

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.

changed milestone to %14.6

added featureaddition frontend grouputilization workflowin dev + 1 deleted label

assigned to @vij

added typefeature label

added backend label

	1 Warning
	featureaddition and featureenhancement merge requests normally have a documentation change. Consider adding a documentation update or confirming the documentation plan with the Technical Writer counterpart. For more information, see: The Handbook page on merge request types. The definition of done documentation.

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
frontend	Sheldon Led (@sheldonled) (UTC+0, same timezone as @vij)	Vitaly Slobodin (@vitallium) (UTC+3, 3 hours ahead of @vij)
test Quality for spec/features/*	Chloe Liu (@chloeliu) (UTC-8, 8 hours behind @vij)	Maintainer review is optional for test Quality for spec/features/*

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

• b8b7e3fb - Conditionally disable group user cap enablement

Compare with previous version

Setting label(s) devopsfulfillment sectionfulfillment based on grouputilization.

added devopsfulfillment sectionfulfillment labels

changed title from Draft: Add validation for new_user_signups_cap enabling to Draft: disable user cap input if shared externally

changed title from Draft: disable user cap input if shared externally to Draft: Disable user cap input if shared externally

mentioned in issue #342227 (closed)

marked this merge request as ready

marked this merge request as draft

added 1588 commits

• b8b7e3fb...b60c838b - 1587 commits from branch master
• 34763001 - Add validation for new_user_signups_cap enabling

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• ec99d570 - Conditionally disable group user cap enablement

Compare with previous version

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report for a746c36c!

review-qa-smoke: test report
review-qa-reliable: test report

added 1 commit

• 2599f872 - Conditionally disable group user cap enablement

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• aa5feb74 - Conditionally disable group user cap enablement

Compare with previous version

mentioned in merge request !75906 (merged)

Blocked by !75906 (merged)

added blocked label

changed the description

changed milestone to %14.7

added 2380 commits

• aa5feb74...9e971c74 - 2379 commits from branch master
• 14bab46f - Conditionally disable group user cap enablement

Compare with previous version

marked this merge request as ready

removed blocked label

changed the description

@sheldonled as you're familiar with this work, would you mind reviewing the frontend changes here?

requested review from @sheldonled

@ddavison would you mind reviewing the QA changes please?

requested review from @ddavison

@mnearents as I'm making a user facing change here, would you also mind reviewing please?

requested review from @mnearents

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

approved this merge request

removed review request for @ddavison

@ddavison, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline has been started.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

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

approved this merge request

requested review from @psimyn and removed review request for @sheldonled

approved this merge request

requested review from @sheldonled and removed review request for @psimyn and @mnearents

requested review from @psimyn and removed review request for @sheldonled

added 1 commit

• 157512a4 - Apply 1 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)

Compare with previous version

@sselhorn would you mind taking a look at !76130 (comment 808882711) when you have a chance? I've applied @psimyn's suggestion but if you think it needs to change again, just let me know!