They generally should work together unless there are new features that
you are trying to use in the 2.9.0 client which the 2.8.6 server cannot
honor.
The release notes [0] should call out these new features or you can look
in the tracker with a query like this one [1] for 2.9.0 "stories" (aka
Given the 2.8.6 patch release (which fixed my errata sync issue thanks!) and
the "official" latest is 2.9.0, will
Clients with 2.9.0 work with a 2.8.6 server? The default rhl-pulp.repo has:
baseurl=https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/stable/2/$releasever/$basearch/
Which has the 2.9 b
Pulp 2.9.1 Beta 1 is now available in the beta repositories:
https://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/pulp/pulp/beta/2.9/
This release includes fixes to Pulp Platform, as well as the Docker plugin,
RPM plugin, Puppet plugin, and crane.
Of particular interest to RPM users are issues #1949 and #2048
1. We use the api to script creation of Pulp users and roles
2. We use the api to script assignment of permissions on repos to Pulp
roles and users.
3. Users authenticate against our directory using Kerberos
(mod_auth_kerb). Subsequent auths can be done using the certificate
granted by Pulp until t
Additional thoughts from working on some non-IT team roles today:
It would be super nice if repository paths could be nested in the API
path. Meaning I could grant permission to /v3/repositories/some_team/,
then the folks in the role with permission would be able to manage their
own repository cr
Hi,
After upgrading to pulp 2.9, we encounter errors uploading some rpms. For
example protobuf-2.3.0-9.el6.x86_64.rpm from epel fails with this message:
Task Failed
The importer yum_importer indicated a failed response when uploading rpm
unit to
repository external_rpms_el6.
Those are the logs
