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

Reduce doc bloat & prep work for remediation wizard #2968

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024

Conversation

asteflova
Copy link
Member

theforeman/foreman_openscap#546 will introduce an OpenSCAP compliance remediation wizard. This PR is something of a prerequisite before I submit a PR to document the wizard; if I get approval and merge for this PR, I'll revert fb5ab35 to add the steps to cover the wizard.

This PR introduces the following changes:

  • I'm removing existing procedures that describe examining compliance reports.
  • I'm replacing them with a procedure that describes remediation, which includes some (but not all) details from the removed report examination procedures.

The logic behind removing examining and instead documenting remediation is that users don't need documentation to explain the components of a compliance report: if they want to examine a report, they are more likely to just open it in the web UI and, well, look at it. A more likely end goal for users is to be able to address compliance failures, and that involves steps to find and open the compliance reports.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (planned Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8)
  • 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)
  • Foreman 3.4/Katello 4.6 (EL8 only)
  • Foreman 3.3/Katello 4.5 on EL7 & EL8 (Satellite 6.12 on EL8 only; orcharhino 6.4/6.5 on EL8 only)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.3.

The idea is that users don't really need docs to examine compliance
failures; they can explore the web UI for that.

Their end goal is to _remediate_ those failures. And remediating
involves examining the failures (but in less detail than originally
documented).
@asteflova asteflova added Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Not yet reviewed labels Apr 16, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@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.

some initial thoughts. I don't have a host to test a remediation right now, but I assume this has been tested when the old docs were added.

Co-authored-by: Maximilian Kolb <[email protected]>
@asteflova
Copy link
Member Author

some initial thoughts. I don't have a host to test a remediation right now, but I assume this has been tested when the old docs were added.

I didn't test the actual remediation scripts (TBH I think that's out of scope for documenting the procedures anyway), but I did make some changes to the web UI procedures as some steps were not entirely accurate.

@asteflova asteflova merged commit dda0059 into theforeman:master Apr 22, 2024
8 checks passed
@asteflova asteflova deleted the SAT-23533_openscap_remed branch May 7, 2024 09:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants