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

Remove upstream EL7 client repository #3596

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ekohl
Copy link
Member

@ekohl ekohl commented Jan 20, 2025

What changes are you introducing?

Foreman 3.14 has dropped the EL7 client repository and this documents that change.

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

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

I have not completely reviewed all the content bits to see if they're still correct.

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 (EL9 only)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only; orcharhino 7.0 on EL8+EL9)
  • 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)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.7.

ekohl added 3 commits January 20, 2025 12:49
Since 51f5a90 and
9169132 these have been unused.
The option says --content-label so a name should be used.
Foreman 3.14 drops EL7 builds for the client repositories and since the
packages are gone, we can no longer mention it. It also adds a release
note to make that obvious.
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.

one minor suggestion that does not block this PR. Style-wise LGTM; tech ACK: matches https://yum.theforeman.org/client/

  • Client for EL7 for Foreman 3.13 ✔️ as expected
  • Client for EL7 for Foreman nightly: ❌ as expected

@@ -157,11 +157,7 @@
:RepoRHEL8ServerSatelliteUtils: satellite-utils-{RepoSatelliteVersion}-for-rhel-8-x86_64-rpms

// RHEL 7 Satellite repos
:RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteMaintenanceProjectVersion: rhel-7-server-satellite-maintenance-{RepoSatelliteVersion}-rpms
:RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteServerProjectVersion: rhel-7-server-satellite-{RepoSatelliteVersion}-rpms
:RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteServerProjectVersionPrevious: rhel-7-server-satellite-{ProjectVersionPrevious}-rpms
:RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteToolsProjectVersion: rhel-7-server-satellite-client-6-rpms
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like this attributes is only used once as value for another attribute. Out of scope but could be simplified:

$ rg -i RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteToolsProjectVersion
guides/common/attributes-satellite.adoc
163::RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteToolsProjectVersion: rhel-7-server-satellite-client-6-rpms
169::project-client-RHEL7-url: {RepoRHEL7ServerSatelliteToolsProjectVersion}

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I debated that, but I find it worrying we don't have project-client-RHEL9-url either so I decided to leave it out of scope. There's also a chance we'll just drop RHEL 7 in Satellite, but I don't know what the plan for that is right now.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective labels Jan 20, 2025
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.

2 participants