Re: [foreman-dev] [infra] Packaging reorganization

2017-09-04 Thread Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden 

On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 02:13:27PM -0400, Justin Sherrill wrote:


On 09/02/2017 03:00 PM, Eric D Helms wrote:


On Sep 2, 2017 10:22 AM, "Timo Goebel" > wrote:


   I am wondering if we should name the katello-client repository
   either foreman-client or just client. I can think of more plugins
   that need a client package.
   Timo


I was not going to suggest this yet, but since you brought it up and 
know of other client tools I think this would be a great addition 
and coming together for Foreman and Katello.  For the yum 
repositories (maybe this also translates for Debian? sorry I am not 
as familiar with them) I'd then suggest changing our structure to 
the following:
It might be even more out of scope, but i could see value in having 
hammer and all the hammer plugins in a client repo as well.


From an issue in puppet-foreman we know users deploy Hammer using 
puppet-foreman without installing foreman itself so that might make 
sense. Makes me wonder if we should split off foreman::cli into a 
separate hammer module.



-Justin



http://yum.theforeman.org
 -- nightly/
-- foreman/
  -- el7/
-- plugins/
-- el7/
-- client/
-- el7/
  -- el6/
  -- el5/
  -- f25/
  -- f26/
-- katello/
  -- el7/
-- pulp/
-- el7/
-- candlepin/
-- el7/
 -- 1.15
 -- 1.14

Another question, though possibly overkill would be if its worth 
separating out the smart proxy (and plugins) to their own repository 
to differentiate them more clearly (and potentially support more 
distros?).



   On 2. Sep 2017, at 01:48, Eric D Helms mailto:ericdhe...@gmail.com>> wrote:


   Howdy,

   As a lead-in to being working towards migrating Katello's
   packages to the foreman-packaging repository, I'd like to propose
   a slight re-organization of the repository. As well, to seek any
   other ideas or problems any might see with the proposal.

   Currently, the packaging repository is a flat structure with all
   packages being represented by a directory containing sources and
   a spec file. When looking at it, I find it hard to think about
   them in an organized manner given we separate by repository into
   foreman and foreman-plugins (and eventually katello
   repositories). Thus, my proposal is to let the packaging
   repository reflect the repository organization by moving things
   into the following directories:

   foreman-packaging
  - foreman
  - plugins
  - katello
  - katello-client


   Thoughts?


--
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] [infra] Packaging reorganization

2017-09-04 Thread Justin Sherrill 



On 09/02/2017 03:00 PM, Eric D Helms wrote:



On Sep 2, 2017 10:22 AM, "Timo Goebel" > wrote:


I am wondering if we should name the katello-client repository
either foreman-client or just client. I can think of more plugins
that need a client package.
Timo


I was not going to suggest this yet, but since you brought it up and 
know of other client tools I think this would be a great addition and 
coming together for Foreman and Katello.  For the yum repositories 
(maybe this also translates for Debian? sorry I am not as familiar 
with them) I'd then suggest changing our structure to the following:
It might be even more out of scope, but i could see value in having 
hammer and all the hammer plugins in a client repo as well.


-Justin



http://yum.theforeman.org
  -- nightly/
 -- foreman/
   -- el7/
 -- plugins/
-- el7/
 -- client/
-- el7/
   -- el6/
   -- el5/
   -- f25/
   -- f26/
 -- katello/
   -- el7/
 -- pulp/
-- el7/
 -- candlepin/
-- el7/
  -- 1.15
  -- 1.14

Another question, though possibly overkill would be if its worth 
separating out the smart proxy (and plugins) to their own repository 
to differentiate them more clearly (and potentially support more 
distros?).



On 2. Sep 2017, at 01:48, Eric D Helms mailto:ericdhe...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Howdy,

As a lead-in to being working towards migrating Katello's
packages to the foreman-packaging repository, I'd like to propose
a slight re-organization of the repository. As well, to seek any
other ideas or problems any might see with the proposal.

Currently, the packaging repository is a flat structure with all
packages being represented by a directory containing sources and
a spec file. When looking at it, I find it hard to think about
them in an organized manner given we separate by repository into
foreman and foreman-plugins (and eventually katello
repositories). Thus, my proposal is to let the packaging
repository reflect the repository organization by moving things
into the following directories:

foreman-packaging
   - foreman
   - plugins
   - katello
   - katello-client


Thoughts?

-- 
Eric D. Helms

Red Hat Engineering
-- 
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
.


--
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] [Infra] Proposal to Move Jenkins Job Configurations

2017-09-04 Thread Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden 

On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 08:02:32AM -0400, Eric D Helms wrote:

On Sep 2, 2017 6:27 AM, "Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden" <
ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote:


On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 07:27:23PM -0400, Eric D Helms wrote:


Howdy,

Some quick background, for those that don't know a majority of our Jenkins
job configuration are stored in git. I find our Jenkins job configuration
to be important for developers to be able to understand and contribute
changes. However, today, these configurations are stored deep inside the
foreman-infra [1] repository. I am proposing one of two ideas to bring
these to the forefront:

1) Move them to the top of foreman-infra under a "jenkins" or "jobs" folder
2) Move them to their own repository (e.g. foreman-ci)


[1]
https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-infra/tree/master/puppet/modules/jenkins_job_builder/files/theforeman.org



+1 on bringing them to the forefront. The question where to put them is,
for better or worse, tightly coupled to the way we deploy them. Currently
it's puppet. If you move them to the top it can still be deployed easily
with a symlink or other scripting magic.

Splitting to their own repository makes it harder to re-use the puppet
deployment pipeline and we'd need to build a new one. Where would we put
this? Usually you think of Jenkins when building a pipeline but having
Jenkins manage itself might not be the best idea.


Could the puppet just clone the repository if using option #2 and work like
before?


This biggest challenge I see here is the correct triggers, but I must 
admit that I don't know how it's triggered now. AFAIK foreman-infra 
currently pretty much contains /etc/puppet and is checked out there. 
This should also be moved to a proper control repository (and there's a 
TODO item for that).



Given that background right now I'm leaning to 1) but I can easily be
convinced of 2) if a more suitable deployment method is found.


--
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.

[foreman-dev] 1.15.4 status - few outstanding issues

2017-09-04 Thread Daniel Lobato Garcia 
Hi devs,

Before 1.15.4 is out, I would like to get the following issues resolved,
as that would mark (most likely) the end of the 1.15 series save some
security problem or major bug.

 1 - http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/19990 - Updating VMs via API
 2 - https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/pull/4808 - resolving
 templates for image-based provisioning
 3 -http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/19742 - extremely slow
 fact_values call for non-admin users
 4 - http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/19730 - warning 'not
 recommended to unlock this template' doesnt work

Help with any of these, by commenting/reviewing/submitting a PR is very
appreciated. If you've found something worthy of 1.15.4 please feel free
to reply here.

Find the full list of 1.15.4 slated fixes in:
http://projects.theforeman.org/rb/release/287

Best,

--
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.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [foreman-dev] [infra] Packaging reorganization

2017-09-04 Thread Marek Hulán 
Perhaps the foreman_scap_client could be one. There's the gem itself [1] and 
configuring puppet module that we also package [2]

[1] 
https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/tree/rpm/1.16/rubygem-foreman_scap_client
[2] 
https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/tree/rpm/1.16/puppet-foreman_scap_client

--
Marek

On sobota 2. září 2017 16:22:36 CEST Timo Goebel wrote:
> I am wondering if we should name the katello-client repository either
> foreman-client or just client. I can think of more plugins that need a
> client package. Timo
> 
> > On 2. Sep 2017, at 01:48, Eric D Helms  wrote:
> > 
> > Howdy,
> > 
> > As a lead-in to being working towards migrating Katello's packages to the
> > foreman-packaging repository, I'd like to propose a slight
> > re-organization of the repository. As well, to seek any other ideas or
> > problems any might see with the proposal.
> > 
> > Currently, the packaging repository is a flat structure with all packages
> > being represented by a directory containing sources and a spec file. When
> > looking at it, I find it hard to think about them in an organized manner
> > given we separate by repository into foreman and foreman-plugins (and
> > eventually katello repositories). Thus, my proposal is to let the
> > packaging repository reflect the repository organization by moving things
> > into the following directories:
> > 
> > foreman-packaging
> > 
> >- foreman
> >- plugins
> >- katello
> >- katello-client
> > 
> > Thoughts?

-- 
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] [Infra] Proposal to Move Jenkins Job Configurations

2017-09-04 Thread Marek Hulán 
On sobota 2. září 2017 1:27:23 CEST Eric D Helms wrote:
> Howdy,
> 
> Some quick background, for those that don't know a majority of our Jenkins
> job configuration are stored in git. I find our Jenkins job configuration
> to be important for developers to be able to understand and contribute
> changes. However, today, these configurations are stored deep inside the
> foreman-infra [1] repository. I am proposing one of two ideas to bring
> these to the forefront:
> 
>  1) Move them to the top of foreman-infra under a "jenkins" or "jobs" folder
> 2) Move them to their own repository (e.g. foreman-ci)
> 
> 
> [1]
> https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-infra/tree/master/puppet/modules/jenki
> ns_job_builder/files/theforeman.org

+1 to whatever new location. Since I already know they live in foreman-infra, 
I'm fine with keeping them there.

--
Marek

-- 
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] Changing PR processor introduction text

2017-09-04 Thread Ivan Necas 
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 at 09:41, Lukas Zapletal  wrote:

> I was just trying to bring your attention. With amounts of lists I
> read everyday, this helps me (I actually have a filter that will
> colorize the thread for me).


Since we are already off-topic here, +1 on /cc for folks that needs special
attention on the thread, despite they are on the list.

-- Ivan


>
> LZ
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Greg Sutcliffe 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 13:55 +0200, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> >> That's actually very good idea, because processor only comments when
> >> there is an issue and these are generic recommendation.
> >>
> >> Greg, do you want to write down some nice proposal for such a
> >> template?
> >
> > Yes I can do that. I'll add it to my list, thanks for the idea.
> >
> > Side note, why are you CC'ing me? I'm on this list anyway :D
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > --
> > 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.
>
>
>
> --
> Later,
>   Lukas @lzap Zapletal
>
> --
> 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.

Re: [foreman-dev] Changing PR processor introduction text

2017-09-04 Thread Lukas Zapletal 
I was just trying to bring your attention. With amounts of lists I
read everyday, this helps me (I actually have a filter that will
colorize the thread for me).

LZ

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Greg Sutcliffe  wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 13:55 +0200, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
>> That's actually very good idea, because processor only comments when
>> there is an issue and these are generic recommendation.
>>
>> Greg, do you want to write down some nice proposal for such a
>> template?
>
> Yes I can do that. I'll add it to my list, thanks for the idea.
>
> Side note, why are you CC'ing me? I'm on this list anyway :D
>
> Greg
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Later,
  Lukas @lzap Zapletal

-- 
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] Enabling RHEL7 extra repository on koji

2017-09-04 Thread Lukas Zapletal 
Wait, I realized we have RHEL 7.0 as buildroot in koji, it does not
contain yet this package. In this version the policy is completely
missing, I will need to figure out a different solution to that.
Scratch that, I don't need extras repo in this case.

LZ

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Eric D Helms  wrote:
> Works for me. Would only the foreman-nightly-rhel7 tag need this as an
> external repository?
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Lukas Zapletal  wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> we have a long-standing bug in SELinux (#18284) - conflict between
>> docker and foreman policies. In order to properly handle this, we need
>> to have container-selinux present in the buildroot. The thing is this
>> is RHEL7 extras repository, we only have base and optional.
>>
>> I would like to propose enabling this in the next maintenance window.
>>
>> --
>> Later,
>>   Lukas @lzap Zapletal
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Eric D. Helms
> Red Hat Engineering
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Later,
  Lukas @lzap Zapletal

-- 
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.

Re: [foreman-dev] [infra] Packaging reorganization

2017-09-04 Thread Lukas Zapletal 
If there is a package that belongs to more than one top-level
directory, where should it go? For example katello and katello-client?

I like flat structure, although it's bummer sometimes to hit the right
dir, using auto completion can help you.

But I can live with the change, not a blocker for me.

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Eric D Helms  wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> As a lead-in to being working towards migrating Katello's packages to the
> foreman-packaging repository, I'd like to propose a slight re-organization
> of the repository. As well, to seek any other ideas or problems any might
> see with the proposal.
>
> Currently, the packaging repository is a flat structure with all packages
> being represented by a directory containing sources and a spec file. When
> looking at it, I find it hard to think about them in an organized manner
> given we separate by repository into foreman and foreman-plugins (and
> eventually katello repositories). Thus, my proposal is to let the packaging
> repository reflect the repository organization by moving things into the
> following directories:
>
> foreman-packaging
>- foreman
>- plugins
>- katello
>- katello-client
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Eric D. Helms
> Red Hat Engineering
>
> --
> 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.



-- 
Later,
  Lukas @lzap Zapletal

-- 
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.