Skip to content

BZ1959400: Create separate doc for OCP 3>4 migration #32598

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
Merged
apinnick merged 1 commit into from
Jun 2, 2021
Merged

BZ1959400: Create separate doc for OCP 3>4 migration #32598

apinnick merged 1 commit into from
Jun 2, 2021

Conversation

@apinnick
Copy link
Contributor

@apinnick apinnick commented May 18, 2021 •
edited
Loading

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1959400

Changes:

  • Created a top-level folder for OCP 3 migration: "Migrating from OpenShift Container Platform 3 to 4"
  • Streamlined the installation instructions so that there is less repetition
  • Moved upgrade modules to separate upgrade assembly
  • Moved replication repository modules to installation assembly and deleted the replication repository assembly

4.5+

Preview: https://deploy-preview-32598--osdocs.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/migrating_from_ocp_3_to_4/about-migrating-from-3-to-4.html

Will require redirects and splash page update.

QE done. Second peer review required for the installation assembly.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 18, 2021
@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented May 18, 2021 •
edited
Loading

✔️ Deploy Preview for osdocs ready!

🔨 Explore the source changes: 11e28142b352eafad4c8cc870c36b62fb14f435d

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/osdocs/deploys/60b72c6bf8c4cf0008b732e7

😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-32598--osdocs.netlify.app

@apinnick apinnick changed the title New migrating from ocp3 BZ1959400: Create separate doc for OCP 3> 4 migration May 18, 2021
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch from d84f5c2 to 9c5d7b5 Compare May 18, 2021 09:53
@apinnick apinnick marked this pull request as ready for review May 18, 2021 09:53
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 18, 2021
@apinnick apinnick added branch/enterprise-4.5 branch/enterprise-4.6 branch/enterprise-4.7 branch/enterprise-4.8 peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR labels May 18, 2021
@apinnick apinnick added this to the Future Release milestone May 18, 2021
bergerhoffer
bergerhoffer reviewed May 18, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just two questions, but as long as this new folder is approved, this LGTM!

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR labels May 18, 2021
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch from 9c5d7b5 to ee7cf88 Compare May 18, 2021 13:12
This was referenced May 18, 2021
Closed
Merged
Closed
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch from ee7cf88 to 4f79ab9 Compare May 23, 2021 14:53
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 23, 2021
@apinnick apinnick marked this pull request as draft May 23, 2021 14:55
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 23, 2021
@apinnick apinnick removed the peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR label May 23, 2021
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch 3 times, most recently from 18ba8b2 to f413624 Compare May 23, 2021 15:13
@apinnick apinnick added peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR and removed QE Required labels May 24, 2021
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch 2 times, most recently from c19f1b2 to c7e903e Compare May 24, 2021 14:43
bergerhoffer
bergerhoffer reviewed May 25, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just some thoughts on the flow of the installation assembly.

@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch 6 times, most recently from 84cdeab to 470a38f Compare May 25, 2021 13:48
apinnick
apinnick commented May 26, 2021
View reviewed changes
migrating_from_ocp_3_to_4/installing-restricted-3-4.adoc Outdated
Copy link
Contributor Author

@apinnick apinnick May 26, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bergerhoffer I think this sentence sounds clunky but I couldn't think of a better way to phrase it. Open to suggestions!

Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer Jun 1, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I don't have any amazing ideas for you, I'd just maybe work in "instructions". Also, are the following items to be done in this order? If so, maybe add them as numbered bullets? I feel like numbered bullets indicate actions that the users need to take as opposed to just an FYI.

Maybe "See the following sections for instructions:" or "For instructions, see the following sections:" ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@apinnick apinnick Jun 2, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I found a solution. I changed the whole mess of bullets to this:

You must create an Operator catalog from a mirror image in a local registry. See xref:../operators/admin/olm-restricted-networks.adoc[Using Operator Lifecycle Manager on restricted networks] for instructions.

bergerhoffer
bergerhoffer reviewed Jun 1, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a few comments, but overall I think the separate assemblies makes it a lot clearer!

migrating_from_ocp_3_to_4/installing-restricted-3-4.adoc Outdated
Copy link
Contributor

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer Jun 1, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I don't have any amazing ideas for you, I'd just maybe work in "instructions". Also, are the following items to be done in this order? If so, maybe add them as numbered bullets? I feel like numbered bullets indicate actions that the users need to take as opposed to just an FYI.

Maybe "See the following sections for instructions:" or "For instructions, see the following sections:" ?

@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch 2 times, most recently from dba6d7c to 11e2814 Compare June 2, 2021 06:59
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch from 11e2814 to 27b01b7 Compare June 2, 2021 07:00
@apinnick apinnick merged commit 7633f72 into openshift:master Jun 2, 2021
@apinnick apinnick deleted the new-migrating-from-ocp3 branch June 2, 2021 08:18
This was referenced Jun 3, 2021
Closed
Merged
Closed
Merged
@apinnick
Copy link
Contributor Author

apinnick commented Jun 7, 2021

/cherrypick enterprise-4.8

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Jun 7, 2021
Merged
@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

openshift-cherrypick-robot commented Jun 7, 2021

@apinnick: new pull request created: #33154

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-4.8

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.

@vikram-redhat vikram-redhat mentioned this pull request Jun 10, 2021
Merged
@apinnick apinnick mentioned this pull request Jun 10, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@bergerhoffer bergerhoffer bergerhoffer left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

branch/enterprise-4.5 branch/enterprise-4.6 branch/enterprise-4.7 branch/enterprise-4.8 peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

OCP 4.8 GA

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@apinnick @xinredhat @openshift-cherrypick-robot @bergerhoffer @vikram-redhat