ci: add auto release flag for mgmt. plane release

[tadelesh]

• The purpose of this PR is explained in this or a referenced issue.
• The PR does not update generated files.
  • These files are managed by the codegen framework at Azure/autorest.go.
• Tests are included and/or updated for code changes.
• Updates to CHANGELOG.md are included.
• MIT license headers are included in each file.

Resolve #17351

[tadelesh]

Test for release: https://dev.azure.com/azure-sdk/internal/_build/results?buildId=1453746&view=results

[benbp]

Looks good to me but holding approval until we reach a consensus on #17356 (comment)

[tadelesh]

@seankane-msft could you have a review as I exclude the doc validation for the eng/tools folder?

[seankane-msft]

Looks good to me, allowing Wes and Ben to make the final call

[RickWinter]

@benbp @weshaggard What does AutoRelease do? Does that mean a human never clicks the final approval? Do we have sufficient permissions and checks in place to prevent unintentional releases?

[RickWinter]

We need to ensure proper safeguards are in place to prevent unintentional triggers and resulting releases.

[tadelesh]

@benbp @weshaggard What does AutoRelease do? Does that mean a human never clicks the final approval? Do we have sufficient permissions and checks in place to prevent unintentional releases?

@RickWinter The word might be a little bit confusing. Actually Include Release might be more accurate. When it is set to true, the release pipeline will be trigger. Then a pre-release job will check if there is a new version need to be released. If true, the release job will do the changelog check, etc., then WAITING FOR APPROVAL for the truly release. This is used for auto trigger, not for approval the truly release as we want to just do one final approval instead of too many manual work (find pipeline, manual trigger, waiting result, approve the release) for mgmt. plane release. The pipeline has working fine for a long time (Here is the original PR I added it) until the latest change of the condition. Ben and I are trying to fix it with introducing a new flag.

[weshaggard]

Looks reasonable to me. However I defer to @RickWinter on whether or not there are other considerations.