Add #subscribed? method and auto-attach to #subscribe

[bdunne]

No description provided.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.02%) when pulling dc97d19 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same when pulling d918082 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.02%) when pulling d918082 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[Fryguy]

@brandondunne Use << instead of +=. However, you could probably just add a {"--auto" => nil} to the params and get the same effect. Is there an ordering problem that you need to add this first?

[Fryguy]

The last commit says add #subscribed? but it looks like you removed subscribed?

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.01%) when pulling dc51e45 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.02%) when pulling 2664411 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.02%) when pulling 2664411 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[Fryguy]

Does this return the same thing as SubscriptionManager#subscribed_products ? I would think both methods should return the same thing for consistency.

[Fryguy]

More specifically, I noticed in the specs, that one returns an array of string, and the other an array of ids...I'm assuming that's considered the "same thing", but does the caller know to present those differently. I guess my overall question is what is the use case?

[bdunne]

They both return an array. The two sources don't provide any common values. This is the closest that it can get.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same when pulling cec02de on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.09%) when pulling 7a98d84 on brandondunne:subscribing_issues into 789b2bd on ManageIQ:master.