Skip to content
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.

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

Fix 3.9 branch commits and add more Katello 4.11 GA info #2644

Merged
merged 22 commits into from Dec 20, 2023

Conversation

ianballou
Copy link
Contributor

@ianballou ianballou commented Dec 19, 2023

I noticed that numerous commits have gone missing from the 3.9 branch of foreman-documentation.

image

I think d9e7e8c might've been added via a force-push that cleared out the history of prior commits.

In a snippet from https://api.github.com/repos/theforeman/foreman-documentation/events, I saw this:

...
    "payload": {
      ...
      "ref": "refs/heads/3.9",
      "head": "d9e7e8c438bc809773880430d4ec3d10b6703fbb",
      "before": "c677a3a0777145c295921f6b3b48fab95a18d496",
      "commits": [
        {
          "sha": "d9e7e8c438bc809773880430d4ec3d10b6703fbb",
          ...
          "message": "Update DocState to stable",
          ...
        }
      ]
    },
...

If you look at the the "before" hash (https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-documentation/commits/c677a3a0777145c295921f6b3b48fab95a18d496), it contains all the commits that the 3.9 branch should have.

If you look at the "head" hash (https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-documentation/commits/d9e7e8c438bc809773880430d4ec3d10b6703fbb), it contains only d9e7e8c and then some commits that are a bit old at this point.

Regardless, I've reconstructed what should be the state of the 3.9 branch before the force-push. I happened to have a local copy that I was working on. I also cherry-picked in one commit that came in after my change.


I've also included my Katello 4.11 GA commit in the mix that updates the changelogs as the very last commit.

Lennonka and others added 22 commits December 19, 2023 15:50
(cherry picked from commit 5fff493)
* Add "In the {ProjectWebUI} where missing
* Drop various unnecessary whitespace
* Remove "at the bottom" because "Submit" is always at the end
* Remove emphasis for ">"
* Split sentence after "navigate to X > Y"
* Use "{endash}" in template names where applicable

(cherry picked from commit 0ac7968)
For version 3.9 and above, we have started supporting fapolicyd on the Project Server as well as Smart Proxy Server. The procedure to install and enable faplicyd for both of them remains the same. You can install fapolicyd along with fresh installation of Project or SmartProxy, or you can install it on existing Project or SmartProxy.

(cherry picked from commit 3c0349d)
* State that pull-based remote execution uses MQTT
* Remove more mentions of Katello Agent
* Remove related open ports
* Remove links to Upgrading Content Hosts
* Remove qpid and qdrouterd mentions

(cherry picked from commit 0e4dbcc)
The subscription entitlement report no longer lists any
hosts that are
in SCA organizations. It will only output information
for hosts that
are in organizations that do not use simple content
access.

Address recommended suggestions

Change "of" to "in" and bold a feature option.

Edit content into list

Edited content into a list to clarify what each report
contains.

Remove line about only using SCA

Address recommendations

Used attribute for hyphen/dash. Moved content into
Procedure.
A new procedure for refreshing content counts for
SmartProxies/Capsules
was needed and has been added to the Content Management
Guide.
orcharhino Server contains a shellscript that runs an Ansible playbook
that contains Ansible roles to add and/or update existing operating
system entries and associated templates on orcharhino Server.

(cherry picked from commit 43f6e90)
RHEL hosts have to be scanned with a supported SCAP content,
which is the SSG designated for the minor RHEL version.
Created reference module to show users how they can see
RHEL client support coming to EOS within a year of EOS.
Co-authored-by: Zuzana Lena Ansorgová <zuansorg@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit 6b587bd)
Copy link

The PR preview for 3eb3c92 is available at theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-2644.surge.sh

The following output files are affected by this PR:

show diff

show diff as HTML

@maximiliankolb
Copy link
Contributor

TODO: Merged but not cherry-picked:

I can take care of this after the "3.9" state has been restored.

As of this morning, my local repo looks as follows:

$ git status
On branch 3.9
Your branch and 'upstream/3.9' have diverged,
and have 17 and 1 different commits each, respectively.
  (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)

nothing to commit, working tree clean
$ git log -n 1
commit 5afac4cd9cd1cca6d1b87a0e690dde8bfba2be79 (HEAD -> 3.9)
Author: Brian Angelica <91690569+bangelic@users.noreply.github.com>
Date:   Wed Dec 13 03:13:10 2023 -0500

    Add lifecycle to path in navigation (#2635)
    
    (cherry picked from commit 6968f71b4c7634ab0d2bb44cdee8dba4b9f3ce6a)

Copy link
Contributor

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I had a look at your PR locally and compared your branch to my local "3.9" branch:

$ git fetch upstream pull/2644/head:review_2644
$ git diff --name-only 3.9 review_2644
guides/common/attributes.adoc                                                                                                                                                                                 
guides/common/modules/con_pull-based-rex-transport-tuning.adoc
guides/common/modules/proc_decreasing-performance-impact-of-the-pull-based-rex-transport.adoc
guides/common/modules/proc_disabling-puppet.adoc
guides/common/modules/proc_increasing-host-limit-for-pull-based-rex-transport.adoc
guides/common/modules/ref_system-requirements-for-tuning.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/master.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/topics/foreman-3.9.0.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/topics/foreman-contributors.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/topics/foreman.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/topics/katello-4.11.0.adoc
guides/doc-Release_Notes/topics/katello.adoc
guides/doc-Tuning_Performance/master.adoc

These are either files I know we've been working on recently (e.g. REX Pull; performance tuning; disabling Puppet), or are Release Notes-related. 👍

I did not review the diff closely, but I think this looks good. Thank you Ian for investigating and providing a fix!

@mjivraja
Copy link
Contributor

Out of curiosity, did this happen because the feature branch wasn't properly rebased with the source branch?

@ianballou
Copy link
Contributor Author

Out of curiosity, did this happen because the feature branch wasn't properly rebased with the source branch?

Not a rebasing problem -- the release owner sometimes pushes code to release branches directly, but in this case it was an accidental force push from a local directory that was missing commits. The force push overwrote the commit history, which made it look like commits went missing.

Thankfully even with a force push, things aren't completely erased from git!

@mjivraja
Copy link
Contributor

Not a rebasing problem -- the release owner sometimes pushes code to release branches directly, but in this case it was an accidental force push from a local directory that was missing commits. The force push overwrote the commit history, which made it look like commits went missing.

Thankfully even with a force push, things aren't completely erased from git!

Oww yes, I saw master in the PR that erased commits, which I assumed to be the same name feature branch initially. The author might have missed pulling the latest changes from the remote branch.

Thank you for your explanation 👍

@ekohl
Copy link
Member

ekohl commented Dec 20, 2023

I think d9e7e8c might've been added via a force-push that cleared out the history of prior commits.

Excellent find @ianballou because I wasn't aware this was logged in the events API.

I don't see why that PR should have been pushed directly: it should be a PR. Is this something that should be made explicit in the procedure?

cc @Griffin-Sullivan

Not a rebasing problem -- the release owner sometimes pushes code to release branches directly, but in this case it was an accidental force push from a local directory that was missing commits. The force push overwrote the commit history, which made it look like commits went missing.

Git has --force-with-lease which at least refuses to push if the remote has updated since you last fetched, providing a bit more safety.

@Griffin-Sullivan
Copy link
Contributor

I feel like there's other steps that have you push directly to non-master branches, but I'm not really sure why I chose to push directly instead of make a PR. We could add a note in the procedure.

@maximiliankolb
Copy link
Contributor

We should configure the project to not allow force pushes to "X.Y" & "master" branches.

Copy link
Member

@ekohl ekohl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's get this in.

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ Features performance improvements most notably around import/export for disconne

=== Pulpcore

The pulpcore module stream must be disabled before updating packages.
The pulpcore module must be disabled before upgrading to Katello 4.11.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note to self: there is a step in the upgrade guide that 43e1e32 adds again.

@ianballou ianballou merged commit 24f50d2 into theforeman:3.9 Dec 20, 2023
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants