Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Document structured APT content #3464

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 5, 2024

Conversation

maximiliankolb
Copy link
Contributor

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb commented Nov 21, 2024

What changes are you introducing?

docs for Foreman+Katello to provide structured APT content

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

docs for Katello/katello#11058

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

the PR is based on a KB article in ATIX Service Portal.

Checklists

  • 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 3.13/Katello 4.15 (Satellite 6.17)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • 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.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 21, 2024

+
[options="nowrap" subs="+quotes,verbatim,attributes"]
----
# {foreman-maintain} maintenance-mode start
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I could not find any instance of "maintenance-mode" in the docs. But I've tested this and it has been previously ACK'ed at ATIX internally.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb marked this pull request as ready for review November 22, 2024 09:21
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Nov 22, 2024
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective and removed Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective labels Nov 22, 2024
Copy link
Contributor Author

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Applied both suggestions.

Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A couple of questions:

  • Wouldn't this work better in the Administering guide? The setting should be added to the Content settings reference, at least.
  • Instead of "enabling structured APT content", wouldn't you rather say "migrating X to structured APT content"? Migration is usually one-time and one-way thing, but enabling suggests that it can be disabled again.

@pr-processor pr-processor bot added the Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author label Dec 4, 2024
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Dec 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor Author

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rebased to "master" and applied all feedback. I hope it's ok to list the prerequisites for hosts that want to consume structured APT content in the concept file. What do you think @Lennonka ?

Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, that works nicely! LGTM

@Lennonka Lennonka added style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Dec 5, 2024
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb merged commit 9e13409 into theforeman:master Dec 5, 2024
8 of 9 checks passed
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb deleted the structured_apt_content branch December 5, 2024 14:13
maximiliankolb added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2024
@maximiliankolb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Merged to "master" and cherry-picked to "3.13":
472787c..ce4dea0 3.13 -> 3.13

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective tech review done No issues from the technical perspective
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants