Katello provides full backup and restore scripts for users. We've not tested it for this specific case and or migrating a large infrastructure. Nor have we given guidance which are my bigger concerns.
On Jul 29, 2016 6:57 AM, "Daniel Lobato Garcia" <elobat...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/29, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > > > That said, I believe security updates are the most important to them > so > > > > you could consider supporting the last release on EL6 a bit longer. I > > > > don't know how much of a time/effort difference that makes compared > to > > > > supporting it longer on the newest release. > > > > > > Yeah, I can certainly try for a bit longer if it's useful to people, > > > though help doing the backports may be appreciated when we get there. > > > > I think we are discussing two things which are different. > > > > Maintaining EL6 releases is one thing and we are not dropping that at > > all - we are sticking with our commitment. For those who need even > > longer support cycle there are 3rd party vendors like Red Hat. > > > > On the other hand, what Dominic suggest is dropping EL6 from the next > > release. That's a different story. And that's not that hot topic from > > user perspective, but plugins should be taken into consideration for > > sure. > > > > For discovery, I can say I am fine with dropping EL6 from the next > > release, but I can understand this is huge move and if there is a chance > > to postpone this one another release let's just do it. But I would like > > to see immediate planning and actions in order to achieve smooth exit > > phase. > > > > Can we identify first what needs to be done in order to drop EL6? Also > > can we do something for users to smoother the experience? Some web > > banners, blog posts? Perhaps a RFC can help here so it's recorded and > > visible for others. > > https://www.theforeman.org/manuals/1.12/#5.5Backup,RecoveryandMigration > contains all that's needed to move your Foreman instance somewhere else, > that one is not an issue IMO. > > The migration would be complicated for users who run TFTP/DHCP/DNS > (etc..) on the same host. Then again they can just keep the proxy > running there and hook the new Foreman (1.13 in el7) to the old el6 box. > > Same thing applies to Katello I think. I'm not sure about any traces > that katello leaves on the Foreman box but if users can keep their el6 > proxy with Pulp, that's not a major issue. They can upgrade Foreman but > keep the old el6 proxy with Pulp, and not upgrade the proxy. I am not > aware of any way of migrating candlepin information to another box (or > connecting to a capsule just for candlepin) so pointers to that would be > very helpful. > > I don't know much about migrating tasks (Dynflow), so any guides on that > would help too. > > tl;dr: Migrating Foreman itself should be a piece of cake. For services > that are not that easy to migrate such as Pulp, TFTP, DHCP, DNS, users > can keep their el6 proxies and those ought to be compatible with Foreman > 1.13. > > -- > Daniel Lobato Garcia > > @dLobatog > blog.daniellobato.me > daniellobato.me > > GPG: http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A92D6DD38D6DE30 > Keybase: https://keybase.io/elobato > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
