[CIAB] Hide Blaze and Payments from hub menu

[RafaelKayumov]

WOOMOB-1272

Description

Utilizes CIABEligibilityChecker and conditionally removes "Payments" and "Blaze" options from Hub Menu. Also Injects CIABEligibilityChecker into BlazeEligibilityChecker. BlazeEligibilityChecker now takes into account if the site is CIAB.

Non-CIAB site testing case (default behaviour)

• Use testing site that doesn't contain "garden" or "ciab" in name (this is the temp CIAB / non-CIAB site distinguishing logic).
• Site should be eligible for Blaze.
• Navigate to "Menu" tab.
• Make sure "Payments" and "Blaze" items are presented.

• Navigate to a product on product tab.
• Make sure the "Blaze" item is presented.

CIAB site testing case

• Add "garden" or "ciab" into site name in admin dashboard
• Restart the app and make sure the name change took place
• Navigate to "Menu" tab.
• Make sure "Payments" and "Blaze" items are NOT presented.

• Navigate to a product on product tab.
• Make sure the "Blaze" item is NOT presented.

Testing Info

Tested the above steps on iPhone Simulator 18.4

---

• I have considered if this change warrants user-facing release notes and have added them to RELEASE-NOTES.txt if necessary.

[wpmobilebot]

📲 You can test the changes from this Pull Request in WooCommerce iOS Prototype by scanning the QR code below to install the corresponding build.

	App Name	WooCommerce iOS Prototype
	Build Number	pr16096-c5dc307
	Version	23.2
	Bundle ID	com.automattic.alpha.woocommerce
	Commit	c5dc307
	Installation URL	3hgc0dgu4i7hg

Automatticians: You can use our internal self-serve MC tool to give yourself access to those builds if needed.

[itsmeichigo]

Tested and confirmed that Blaze and Payments are only available for non-CIAB sites.
I'm confused that Blaze is also hidden from dashboard, while that seems to be part of a draft PR. Could this be an issue with splitting code from a bigger change?

I left some nit-picking in the comments.

[itsmeichigo]

Nit: Please consider adding unit tests to check for this condition.

[RafaelKayumov]

Done in c337898

[itsmeichigo]

Should we inject CIABEligibilityChecker to this checker too?

Suggested change

	blazeEligibilityChecker: BlazeEligibilityCheckerProtocol = BlazeEligibilityChecker(),
	blazeEligibilityChecker: BlazeEligibilityCheckerProtocol? = nil,

then inside init:

self.blazeEligibilityChecker = blazeEligibilityChecker ?? BlazeEligibilityChecker(siteCIABEligibilityChecker: siteCIABEligibilityChecker)

[RafaelKayumov]

Thx for the attention here.
I'd still prefer to leave it. If we make a fallback to BlazeEligibilityChecker(...) for the nil blazeEligibilityChecker argument and them purposely (for whatever reason) pass nil - it will be neglected and overridden by the ?? operator.
Currently the BlazeEligibilityChecker() initializer already has a default value for the siteCIABEligibilityChecker so we should be good. Even if there are different CIABEligibilityChecker instances - they can work independently and show correct results.

[RafaelKayumov]

I'm confused that Blaze is also hidden from dashboard, while that seems to be part of a draft PR. Could this be an issue with splitting code from a bigger change?

@itsmeichigo Thx for the review. That's true. After starting the work on the dashboard cards hiding I also got confused because there was no Blaze card. Turned out to be a bug where the default site was nil upon check in BlazeCampaignDashboardViewModel:

func checkSiteEligibility() async -> Bool {
        guard let site = stores.sessionManager.defaultSite else {
            return false
        }
        return await blazeEligibilityChecker.isSiteEligible(site)
    }

In that draft PR I reworked it and bound to reactive stores.site instead.