[foreman-dev] Re: smart_proxy_openscap tests fail with OpenSCAP >= 1.2.11

2017-05-17 Thread Evgeni Golov
Trivial reproducer, without our code: require 'openscap' require 'openscap/source' require 'openscap/ds/arf' require 'openscap/xccdf/benchmark' scap_file= '/tmp/ruby-openscap/test/data/sds-complex.xml' OpenSCAP.oscap_init @source = OpenSCAP::Source.new(scap_file) sds =

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 04:47:46PM +0200, Michael Moll wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 04:11:31PM +0300, Tomer Brisker wrote: > > Is there some similar solution we can find for Debian so we don't hit the > > same issue when we want to drop 2.1 eventually while still supporting > >

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Michael Moll
Hi, On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 04:11:31PM +0300, Tomer Brisker wrote: > Is there some similar solution we can find for Debian so we don't hit the > same issue when we want to drop 2.1 eventually while still supporting > Jessie? I can't think of a solution that's maintainable without requiring a

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Michael Moll
Hi, On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 03:11:12PM +0300, Tomer Brisker wrote: > What do people think about dropping it in 1.16? This will still give people > enough time to upgrade their systems as 1.15 will still be supported for > the next 6 months. +1 on dropping 2.0 support for Foreman core. --

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Ivan Necas
Tomer Brisker writes: > Hello, > > Ruby 2.0 has been EOL'ed over a year ago. More and more of our dependent > libraries are dropping support for it, which means that we are either stuck > with older versions or need to fix support in those libraries which may or > may not be

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Tomer Brisker
Hi, As a first step, I think about dropping it in Foreman core and its plugins, since those have the largest dependencies and would be easiest to achieve. I would be happy to also drop it in the proxy and the installer, but as Eric mentioned, that would be more complex as we don't SCL those yet,

Re: [foreman-dev] Dropping Ruby 2.0 support in 1.16?

2017-05-17 Thread Eric D Helms
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 03:11:12PM +0300, Tomer Brisker wrote: > > What do people think about dropping it in 1.16? This will still give > people > > enough time to upgrade their systems as 1.15

[foreman-dev] Weekly Dev/Design Meeting: Smart Class Parameters

2017-05-17 Thread Roxanne Hoover
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H_2feb4MkuZobk6gXvYSGpnXl4Vxp5MgUSyfMbgsraA/edit Smart Class Parameters Presented by Ori - Switch order of buttons (http://www.patternfly.org/pattern-library/forms-and-controls/forms/) - Put help text in inline help -

Re: [foreman-dev] Re: [RFC] HTTP proxy for requests

2017-05-17 Thread Justin Sherrill
On 05/17/2017 07:57 AM, Tom McKay wrote: After reading the RFC I think that more robust and adaptable solution would be better. A single env var is not going to cover the needs of all the scenarios. A simple example may be accessing both registry.access.redhat.com

Re: [foreman-dev] Migration to Copr POC

2017-05-17 Thread Dominic Cleal
On 16/05/17 13:32, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > Delete existing testing Copr repositories in @theforeman Copr group, > it's not shown in the UI who created them but I believe it was Dominic > or Eric: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/groups/g/theforeman/coprs/ Those are mine, you can delete them if