Skip to content

Conversation

@apinnick
Copy link
Contributor

@apinnick apinnick commented Oct 21, 2025

What changes are you introducing?

Add an abstract to the virt-who configuration procedure.

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

Testing Cursor command

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

Contributor checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 3.16/Katello 4.18 (Satellite 6.18)
  • Foreman 3.15/Katello 4.17
  • Foreman 3.14/Katello 4.16 (Satellite 6.17; orcharhino 7.4)
  • Foreman 3.13/Katello 4.15 (EL9 only)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16; orcharhino 7.2 on EL9 only; orcharhino 7.3)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only; orcharhino 7.0 on EL8+EL9; orcharhino 7.1 with Leapp)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.9.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Oct 21, 2025
@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the abstract-virt-who-config branch 2 times, most recently from 6551fa9 to 2c6d854 Compare October 21, 2025 11:36
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 21, 2025

@apinnick apinnick force-pushed the abstract-virt-who-config branch from 2c6d854 to 1b46ae9 Compare October 21, 2025 11:41
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author and removed Not yet reviewed labels Oct 23, 2025
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Oct 26, 2025
@Lennonka Lennonka removed Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Oct 28, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@Lennonka Lennonka added style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Oct 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants