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

Clarify applying custom Puppet config #3752

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova commented Mar 27, 2025

What changes are you introducing?

  • Clarifying how to apply custom Puppet configuration
  • Clarifying the support level of applying custom Puppet configuration

Excluding appendices on applying custom configuration from Satellite

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

The support level is not entirely clear right now.

This custom configuration is not supported for Satellite.

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

N/A

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 3.14/Katello 4.16
  • 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; orcharhino 7.1 with Leapp)
  • 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.

Sorry, something went wrong.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Mar 27, 2025
maximiliankolb
maximiliankolb previously approved these changes Mar 27, 2025
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.

LGTM!

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb 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 Mar 27, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova removed the Needs testing Requires functional testing label Mar 27, 2025
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Turns out that hiding the sections completely is not what we want. Instead, I'll try to clarify the support level of applying custom configuration and generally clean up both sections a little bit.

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova changed the title Exclude custom config appendices from satellite Clarify applying custom Puppet config Apr 2, 2025
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb self-requested a review April 3, 2025 06:28
@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb dismissed their stale review April 3, 2025 06:28

content changed. needs re-review.

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.

Thanks Anet. One tiny but blocking comment; rest LGTM style-wise. Would be great if someone can do a tech review on this PR.

Verified

This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature.
Co-authored-by: Maximilian Kolb <[email protected]>
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Would be great if someone can do a tech review on this PR.

Absolutely! I haven't asked for one but will do so (hopefully) next week.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants