Re: [foreman-dev] Plugin Proposal: User-defined ENC mutation

Thanks Marek, this is helpful. I'll work on an RFC to try and hash out some of the details. On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 9:58:59 AM UTC-4, Marek Hulán wrote: > > Hello > > thanks for the write up. first of all - I find it useful. Not only for > users but > for plugin developers too. I

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

Lzap, You do realize that every other plugin except Katello is under the foreman project in redmine, correct? David On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > Is there a case for keeping katello separate any longer, or can we > combine? > > Because it's a

[foreman-dev] Re: Pushed downstream translations to Transifex

Bump on this. Any feedback is appreciated. On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 1:13:19 PM UTC-4, bk wrote: > > This is a followup to the ConfigCamp discussion on translations. > > During the Satellite 6.2 release, Red Hat engaged a set of professional > translators to localize the application. This was

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > Is there a case for keeping katello separate any longer, or can we > combine? > > Because it's a plugin? And plugins have its own release cadence, own > planning (Release versions, Target versions) and Categories. I

[foreman-dev] updates to test_develop_pull_request update subjobs

Hi all, Ori sent a pin to develop today[1] for the fast_gettext gem, however the update17 subjob was still failing. Since these jobs are (I think) meant to test db migrations on the currently supported versions, it seemed right to update them to test against 1.11-stable and 1.12-stable. So, I've

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Lukas Zapletal wrote: >> Is there a case for keeping katello separate any longer, or can we combine? > > Because it's a plugin? And plugins have its own release cadence, own > planning (Release versions, Target versions) and Categories. I don't see

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

> For example, several dev teams are experimenting with redmine "versions" > for their sprints[1]. I don't think that a single version can include One more thing. This will pollute Target versions, I don't like this. Can't we simply use Issue trackers for that? Redmine is quite good in creating

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

> Is there a case for keeping katello separate any longer, or can we combine? Because it's a plugin? And plugins have its own release cadence, own planning (Release versions, Target versions) and Categories. I don't see enough benefits of merging when I consider all the above. I don't know, I

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible to move redmine Katello project under Foreman?

+1 to less separation of the two projects in our overhead organization of issues/features. Andrew Kofink Software Engineering Intern Red Hat Satellite 6 akof...@redhat.com On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Marek Hulán wrote: > +1 for moving into Foreman project subtree > > --

Re: [foreman-dev] No uploader

Hello, how did you install the handler? You have to modify /etc/chef/client.rb to register it. See [1] for example how to do it [1] https://github.com/theforeman/chef-handler-foreman#installation On Tuesday 02 of August 2016 11:46:40 Thomas Fee wrote: > Trying to get chef-handler-foreman to