Re: [foreman-dev] Foreman instrumenting analysis

I lean towards the push model here. The main reason is the simpler way to publish the instrumentation data from whatever process we want to track. Also, my understanding is, that we don't care only if the service is up or down (readiness and liveness) but also about trends during the processing.

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Tried to reply with just few words and I am getting: We’re sorry, but your email message to [“theforeman.discourse+680bec16c469f36694d1ecef341e8...@gmail.com”] (titled Re: [TheForeman] [Testing Area] October newsletter) didn’t work. Reason: Body is too short (minimum is 20 characters) If you can

AW: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Hi Greg, so you tested the happy flow. But as a scientist i must ask you, did you check the opposite, too? Does someone not being the author nor a member of the mentioned group not receive the notification? cheers Herzliche Grüße aus München Matthias Dellweg -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >

Re: [foreman-dev] Moving katello puppet modules to the foreman github namespace

I am ready to move them when you give the green light. My inclination for permissions and team setup would be to maintain all individual maintership on the modules to date. Further, to take the katello installer team and add them to a similar installer team on theforeman organization. On Thu,

[foreman-dev] Moving katello puppet modules to the foreman github namespace

Hello all, Previously this has been discussed in various threads but now we're ready to make it a reality. All modules should be ready to use a single modulesync repository and a pull request has been opened. https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-installer-modulesync/pull/78 lists all tasks

Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

Big +1 to all of that. I think COPR provides some own GPG keys and IIRC you can't override those. It is possible to download packages from COPR and sign them again with a custom key of course. That's perhaps your plan I guess. Custom signatures is on COPR development TODO I think. LZ On Wed,

Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 11:24:26AM +0100, Daniel Lobato Garcia wrote: Just one question, my understanding is that you prefer to do this (SCL) because we are uncertain of the time/effort required for vendoring the gems/npm packages. Given that long-term we would have to keep up building SCLs

Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

I agree with all of that, definitely something to do in a different repository. Just one question, my understanding is that you prefer to do this (SCL) because we are uncertain of the time/effort required for vendoring the gems/npm packages. Given that long-term we would have to keep up building

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

I appreciate I tend to write a thousand words when pictures might do. Here's one shot from the metrics (which may or may not be accurate as it depends on the MBOX importer being correct, but you get the idea), one from the foreman-users list index, and one from the markdown version of this post

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

On Wed, 2017-11-01 at 14:15 -0400, Andrew Kofink wrote: > I admit, I skimmed the prior emails (they were tl). I just wanted to > ask if discourse is searchable/is indexed from the wider internet. > I've often found relevant mailing list discussions by searching from > Google, and I really value

Re: [foreman-dev] Merge permission for theforemen/foreman-ansible-modules

+1 here too On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Eric D Helms wrote: > +1 from me as well (I'll aim to add you in the requisite 5 more days > depending on the further outcome) > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden > wrote: