Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Vm retirement is processed by VmRetireRequest state machine. #552

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 14, 2019

Conversation

lfu
Copy link
Member

@lfu lfu commented Jul 26, 2019

Blocks ManageIQ/manageiq#19064.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1702018

@miq-bot add_label bug, hammer/yes, ivanchuk/yes, changelog/yes

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 26, 2019

Checked commit lfu@b910330 with ruby 2.4.6, rubocop 0.69.0, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0
0 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. 🏆

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jul 26, 2019

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 3364

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 96.932%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 3349: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 2938
Relevant Lines: 3031

💛 - Coveralls

@tinaafitz
Copy link
Member

Prior to 5.11, retirement (using retire_now) was event based. When retire_now was called for VM retirement, a request_vm_retire event would be raised and come through the event policy request_vm_retire instance in this PR.
The retirement request event instances remain in 5.11, but are not being used.

The code change in this PR removes the unused entries in the request_vm_retire instance, while leaving the necessary policy event check connection.

@tinaafitz
Copy link
Member

@mkanoor Please review.

@mkanoor
Copy link
Contributor

mkanoor commented Aug 14, 2019

@tinaafitz @lfu
What would happen if the customers have overridden this instance in their own domain with extra stuff before they do the retirement. Do we need a tech note or something to tell them that their instance needs to be updated.

@tinaafitz
Copy link
Member

Yes, @mkanoor, that makes sense. I added a doc release note flag to the ticket. We should document any changes to the ManageIQ domain.

@mkanoor mkanoor merged commit 3e2fb4b into ManageIQ:master Aug 14, 2019
@gmcculloug gmcculloug added this to the Sprint 118 Ending Aug 19, 2019 milestone Aug 20, 2019
@lfu lfu deleted the prevent_retirement_1702018 branch November 4, 2019 15:27
simaishi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2019
Vm retirement is processed by VmRetireRequest state machine.

(cherry picked from commit 3e2fb4b)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783361
@simaishi
Copy link
Contributor

Hammer backport details:

$ git log -1
commit 8945d950176efb5086ce4537e512a3f04fb90366
Author: Madhu Kanoor <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Aug 14 17:52:01 2019 -0400

    Merge pull request #552 from lfu/prevent_retirement_1702018

    Vm retirement is processed by VmRetireRequest state machine.

    (cherry picked from commit 3e2fb4beb1c6d214ca62daa65eb9856d6cc69a5c)

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783361

simaishi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2019
Vm retirement is processed by VmRetireRequest state machine.

(cherry picked from commit 3e2fb4b)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783360
@simaishi
Copy link
Contributor

Ivanchuk backport details:

$ git log -1
commit 87cbdb74de606d1d38e927c5f77ba06a036406fa
Author: Madhu Kanoor <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Aug 14 17:52:01 2019 -0400

    Merge pull request #552 from lfu/prevent_retirement_1702018

    Vm retirement is processed by VmRetireRequest state machine.

    (cherry picked from commit 3e2fb4beb1c6d214ca62daa65eb9856d6cc69a5c)

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1783360

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants