Hide plug-in uninstallation procedures for Satellite

[asteflova]

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-25665 This PR hides a few procedures for uninstalling Foreman plug-ins for Satellite builds. Satellite depends on these plug-ins and they cannot be uninstalled.

• I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
• I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

• Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13
• Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
• Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9)
• Foreman 3.8/Katello 4.10
• Foreman 3.7/Katello 4.9 (Satellite 6.14)
• Foreman 3.6/Katello 4.8
• Foreman 3.5/Katello 4.7 (Satellite 6.13; orcharhino 6.6/6.7)
• We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.5.

[github-actions]

The PR preview for 7fa1fc4 is available at theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-3112.surge.sh

The following output files are affected by this PR:

• Managing_Hosts/index-satellite.html
• Provisioning_Hosts/index-satellite.html

show diff

show diff as HTML

[maximiliankolb]

diff LGTM

[asteflova]

Acked by @evgeni from the technical point of view recently over slack.

[Lennonka]

Cherry-picked:

• 5a18158..2c40ae4 3.11 -> 3.11
• 0f7088b..f145ae4 3.10 -> 3.10
• 13603cd..0d06ee6 3.9 -> 3.9
• 0aa6bee..159ceb5 3.8 -> 3.8
• d9fb96e..aa82a60 3.7 -> 3.7
• 708972c..8be7d48 3.6 -> 3.6
• f583c09..56f9e92 3.5 -> 3.5

[asteflova]

Thanks for stepping in to merge @Lennonka but next time, could you please wait a bit more? This PR has been opened for only 40 minutes. I find it best to wait for at least about a day unless the update is critical. There is always a chance that someone else will offer valuable insight.

[ekohl]

If Satellite depends on the plugins and are always present then shouldn't we hide the installation too?

[ekohl]

We should also drop all --enable-foreman-compute-* sections for Satellite because they're mandatory. There's also a list of Foreman & Hammer plugins we always install so we should also drop the explicit enablement of those.

[asteflova]

@ekohl Will what you're suggesting be covered by https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-26276?

[ekohl]

Depends. That issue certainly was inspired by this PR, though it's something I thought about for longer. We must remove the exact instructions for that issue (if we move forward with it), but that doesn't stop us from cleaning it up already (since it's redundant).

[asteflova]

Great, thanks for clarifying. The best I can do right now is to create an issue: #3114