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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Use foreman-installer for hammer resource quota #3658

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Use foreman-installer for hammer resource quota #3658

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

bastian-src
Copy link

What changes are you introducing?

Install the hammer cli package for the foreman_resource_quota via foreman-installer instead of dnf.

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

foreman-installer is the preferred installation method and becomes available with theforeman/foreman-installer#1007

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

Checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

no cherry-picks: only foreman_resource_quota is part of 3.13; the Hammer CLI plugin is not available in nightly.

@bastian-src
Use foreman-installer for hammer resource quota
99f423d 
The hammer cli resource quota package can now be installed
via foreman-installer, removing the need for installing it
via dnf.
@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 Feb 12, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

The PR preview for 99f423d is available at theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-3658.surge.sh

The following output files are affected by this PR:

show diff

show diff as HTML

maximiliankolb
maximiliankolb approved these changes Feb 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
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 Bastian, LGTM. Tested based on internal MR.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective Waiting for code Requires merge of related code in another repository before it can be merged testing done No issues from the functional perspective and removed 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 Feb 12, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb maximiliankolb approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective tech review done No issues from the technical perspective testing done No issues from the functional perspective Waiting for code Requires merge of related code in another repository before it can be merged
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@bastian-src @maximiliankolb