Branch nailgun tracking latest foreman

[san7ket]

No description provided.

[san7ket]

@evgeni When should we branch for foreman ?

[evgeni]

In an ideal world, where nailgun:master is in sync (feature wise) with foreman:develop: the day Foreman itself branches.

In the worst case, where nailgun:master is far behind foreman:develop: the moment before you merge the first feature PR into nailgun:master that is not compatible foreman:X.Y-stable.

In reality, we'd end up somewhere in between. Katello usually branches the same week, but not the same day as Foreman.

If you want to have this as a "one sentence rule", I'd probably go with: "We branch nailgun as soon as foreman has branched and nailgun:master contains all features required for foreman:X.Y-stable and before any features for the new foreman development cycle are merged"

[san7ket]

Do you have a specific timeframe in mind as to when we should move this, I absolutely agree with you, but currently in Nailgun there is no mechanisms to identify if all foreman:X-Y-stable are in, one familiar with the latest changes in foreman has to peek in nailgun to be sure.

Also, Is it ok if you could make this happen? If not, happy to take this up
Also, I think you must already have all required permissions.

[evgeni]

Do you have a specific timeframe in mind as to when we should move this
You mean implementing the technical side of this issue, or the actual branching?

I absolutely agree with you, but currently in Nailgun there is no mechanisms to identify if all foreman:X-Y-stable are in, one familiar with the latest changes in foreman has to peek in nailgun to be sure.

I think we can improve this gradually.

1. setup notifications (issue creation) from Foreman/Katello to Nailgun when branching happens (this is mostly automated on the Foreman side, so adding another step should be not too complicated)
2. setup notifications when a PR changes the API
3. run foreman-ansible-modules:master with the correct nailgun branch against the correct foreman branch :) [ this might produce a few false positives, but better than silent failures ]

this will at least allow us to track changes easier

Also, Is it ok if you could make this happen? If not, happy to take this up

by "this" you mean the above points? I am a bit tight on time until start of February, so if you want this earlier, don't count too much on me.

[san7ket]

@evgeni I think we can achieve 1 and 2 , but i think we need some kind of trigger to be set on foreman repo to track the changes, I can take this up could you point me in the direction of docs, or how it is done currently for foreman