[CI:BUILD] Packit: add fedora-eln targets and build docs with vendored go-md2man #4964
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: lsm5 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
this will need go-md2man vendoring or switching to pandoc. |
[NO NEW TESTS NEEDED] Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5@fedoraproject.org>
`fedora-all` doesn't include eln targets. We need to add them explicitly. [NO NEW TESTS NEEDED] Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5@fedoraproject.org>
lsm5
changed the title
|
LGTM |
|
/lgtm |
|
/cherry-pick release-1.31 |
|
@lsm5: new pull request could not be created: failed to create pull request against containers/buildah#release-1.31 from head openshift-cherrypick-robot:cherry-pick-4964-to-release-1.31: status code 422 not one of [201], body: {"message":"Validation Failed","errors":[{"resource":"PullRequest","code":"custom","message":"No commits between containers:release-1.31 and openshift-cherrypick-robot:cherry-pick-4964-to-release-1.31"}],"documentation_url":"https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/pulls#create-a-pull-request"} In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
cherrypick was a mistake. I see it's already in the release branch. |
fedora-alldoesn't include eln targets. We need to add them explicitly.This PR also gets rid of
go-md2manas an rpm dependency and directly builds docs from the vendored go-md2man. This enables easy building on rhel8 and eln.[NO NEW TESTS NEEDED]
What type of PR is this?
/kind other
What this PR does / why we need it:
Packit tests on ELN
How to verify it
Tasks for ELN will be created in the CI task list.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
None
Special notes for your reviewer:
None
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?