Remove golden_ticket? method and simplify SCA handling

[jeremylenz]

What are the changes introduced in this pull request?

This PR removes the obsolete golden_ticket? helper method and simplifies Simple Content Access (SCA) handling in inventory reports. The changes include:

• Removed the golden_ticket? method from FactHelpers which referenced Katello methods that no longer exist (golden_ticket? and content_access_mode)
• Changed is_simple_content_access field to always be true in inventory reports, since all organizations are now in SCA mode
• Removed associated tests for the obsolete method
• Updated test data in inventory sync tests to reflect that all organizations are in SCA mode

Considerations taken when implementing this change?

• Katello 4.12 removed entitlement mode and migrated all organizations to SCA-only mode (commits f174f2ed65, 16cbea2ed6, ec23330bd7)
• The is_simple_content_access field is still included in inventory reports (for cloud API compatibility), but is now always true instead of conditionally checking organization settings
• This is backward compatible since the field will always have the correct value for current Katello/Satellite installations

What are the testing steps for this pull request?

1. Run the full test suite to verify no regressions: cd /home/vagrant/foreman && bundle exec rake test:foreman_rh_cloud
2. (Optional) Generate an inventory report for an organization and verify is_simple_content_access: true appears in the satellite facts
3. (Optional) Upload an inventory report to verify the cloud API accepts it with the field set to true

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by Sourcery

Remove legacy Simple Content Access (SCA) handling and always report SCA as enabled in inventory uploads.

Bug Fixes:

• Ensure the is_simple_content_access fact in generated inventory reports is consistently true to match current SCA-only behavior.

Enhancements:

• Remove the obsolete golden_ticket? helper and its caching, simplifying SCA-related logic in fact generation.
• Clean up tests and helpers that stub or depend on golden_ticket? to reflect the always-on SCA model.
• Update inventory sync test fixtures to expect is_simple_content_access to be true in all generated reports.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's guide (collapsed on small PRs)

Reviewer's Guide

This PR removes the obsolete golden_ticket?-based logic from inventory report generation and hardcodes Simple Content Access to always be enabled, while updating tests and fixtures to match the new SCA-only behavior.

Class diagram for updated inventory fact generation helpers

classDiagram

class FactHelpers {
  +account_id(organization)
  +cloud_provider(host)
}

class Slice {
  +report_satellite_facts(host)
}

FactHelpers <.. Slice : uses

Loading

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Remove golden_ticket? helper and its usage from inventory slice generation logic.	Delete golden_ticket? method and its memoization cache from FactHelpers. Stop stubbing golden_ticket? in archived report generator tests and slice generator helper method. Change report_satellite_facts to always emit is_simple_content_access as true instead of consulting organization settings.	lib/foreman_inventory_upload/generators/fact_helpers.rb lib/foreman_inventory_upload/generators/slice.rb test/unit/archived_report_generator_test.rb test/unit/slice_generator_test.rb
Simplify tests to reflect SCA-only mode and remove behavior tied to golden ticket logic.	Remove unit tests that verify golden_ticket? behavior and slice generation for golden ticket organizations. Update inventory sync job tests to expect is_simple_content_access: true in all inventory payloads. Simplify test slice generator helper to no longer stub golden_ticket? by default.	test/unit/fact_helpers_test.rb test/unit/slice_generator_test.rb test/jobs/inventory_hosts_sync_test.rb test/jobs/inventory_full_sync_test.rb test/jobs/inventory_self_host_sync_test.rb

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[chris1984]

Looks good to me, don't see any more references to golden_ticket?

I was wondering if it might make sense to add a small assertion in an existing slice generator test to check that is_simple_content_access is true in the rendered output. The old “golden ticket” test was the only one covering that field in generated reports, so this might help keep that covered. I will leave that up to you and not block it.

Tested:

• Generate an inventory report for an organization and verify is_simple_content_access: true appears in the satellite facts
• Upload an inventory report to verify the cloud API accepts it with the field set to true

[jeremylenz]

@chris1984 good idea, added an assertion. 👍

[chris1984]

LGTM, thanks for adding the assertion.