(Standard links)

• If this is your first pull-request for CiviCRM, please browse CONTRIBUTING.md for information about the development and testing processes.
• If you are reviewing this pull-request, you may wish to consult the test sites and the Review Standards (long template, short template).

test this please

• General standards
  • Explain (r-explain)
    • PASS : The goal/problem/solution have been adequately explained in the PR.
    • COMMENT: We still don't know what the problem is, except something with a template. We tested it and everything still seems to work.
  • User impact (r-user)
    • PASS: The change would be intuitive or unnoticeable for a majority of users who work with this feature.
  • Documentation (r-doc)
    • PASS: The changes do not require documentation.
  • Run it (r-run)
    • PASS: We created a contribution page for sign up of recurring contributions. We used the dummy payment processor for this. We then signed up for a recurring contribution and we checked the contact summary screen and then the section for contributions --> recurring contributions. We pressed view and everything worked as expected.
• Developer standards
  • Technical impact (r-tech)
    • PASS: The change potentially affects compatibility, but the risks have been sufficiently managed.
  • Code quality (r-code)
    • PASS: The functionality, purpose, and style of the code seems clear+sensible.
  • Maintainability (r-maint)
    • PASS: The change is trivial enough that it does not require tests.
  • Test results (r-test)
    • PASS: The test results are all-clear.

@eileenmcnaughton can you merge this PR?

The failing test has nothing to do with this PR. So I would assume this could be safely merged.

OK - the fail does seem unrelated

We should use the [REF] in the PR title to make it easier for reviewers to see that there should be code maintenance improvements but no actual change in a PR (this was originally [NFC] but then that became only used for comments & spelling due to Tim challenging the NFC-ness of some of them

@mattwire @jaapjansma looks like this caused a regression - the enable / disable buttons broke as a result of the very first line in this change

https://lab.civicrm.org/dev/core/-/issues/1961