Removed the requirement for worker nodes. #27459
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/M
|
The preview will be available shortly at: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You don't need to have an extra line between the ID and heading
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll try to police that as I'm doing the upstream/downstream stuff. The guide had a space there, but not between the anchor and heading. https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/blob/master/contributing_to_docs/doc_guidelines.adoc#module-file-metadata
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No xrefs allowed in modules. If this is just for upstream, maybe we can remove it or comment it out?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Effectively, it is commented out, because there is no upstream definition in our files. It's there so that the upstream and downstream modules are identical, but the xref wont be published so it won't break anything. It just makes it easier for us to synchronize.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No xrefs allowed in modules
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's in a conditional tag for upstream, and won't appear downstream.
ahardin-rh
added
peer-review-done
johnwilkins
force-pushed
the
ipi-baremetal-install-4.6-sprint8
branch
from
31c7693 to
cab316b
Compare
|
/cherrypick enterprise-4.6 |
|
/cherrypick enterprise-4.7 |
|
@ahardin-rh: new pull request created: #27516 DetailsIn 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. |
|
@ahardin-rh: new pull request created: #27517 DetailsIn 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. |
|
Hey @johnwilkins - the presence of xref in here in upstream is still an issue, even if it doesn't appear in the downstream. It may affect tooling. Are you able to take it out in a new PR? |
|
What are the issues that you've in your tooling that are affected by a conditional code that doesn't apply? |
|
Hi @iranzo this is a tooling/guideline issue for the customer portal docs for which we have no control over. Here is the related guideline that we must follow: https://redhat-documentation.github.io/modular-docs/#modular-docs-terms-definitions:
For full background discussion: redhat-documentation/modular-docs#64. @johnwilkins can you take these out? |
7 participants
Also fixed s/provision node/provisioner node/ in file name. Synchronized upstream and downstream.
@ahardin-rh
@rlopez133
@iranzo
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897312
Fixes: BZ 1897312
Signed-off-by: John Wilkins jowilkin@redhat.com