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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Service retirement should use make retire as a request #1453

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2018
Merged

Service retirement should use make retire as a request #1453

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2018

Conversation

d-m-u
Copy link
Contributor

@d-m-u d-m-u commented Jul 11, 2018

Since the API call for service retirement changed in ManageIQ/manageiq-api#380 for the new retire as a request, the SUI ought to use the new call.

For https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1599299

@d-m-u d-m-u changed the title Service retirement should use make retire as a request [WIP] Service retirement should use make retire as a request Jul 11, 2018
@d-m-u
Copy link
Contributor Author

d-m-u commented Jul 11, 2018

@miq-bot add_label bug, blocker

@d-m-u d-m-u force-pushed the changing_api_call_for_service_retirement_to_use_make_request branch from 411631c to 0de7e2f Compare July 11, 2018 14:57
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 11, 2018

Checked commit d-m-u@0de7e2f with ruby 2.3.3, rubocop 0.52.1, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0
0 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. 🍰

@d-m-u d-m-u closed this Jul 11, 2018
@d-m-u d-m-u reopened this Jul 11, 2018
@d-m-u
Copy link
Contributor Author

d-m-u commented Jul 11, 2018 •
edited
Loading

I can't get this to fail locally, so that's cool. 🎉

@d-m-u d-m-u changed the title [WIP] Service retirement should use make retire as a request Service retirement should use make retire as a request Jul 11, 2018
@AllenBW
Copy link
Member

AllenBW commented Jul 11, 2018

@d-m-u don't sweat it, travis loves to play games with our hearts, (well its not travis.. but.. its an easy blame so 🤷‍♂️ ) So can this be unwipped, ready for review?

@AllenBW AllenBW requested review from AllenBW and chalettu July 11, 2018 15:46
@miq-bot miq-bot removed the wip label Jul 11, 2018
@d-m-u
Copy link
Contributor Author

d-m-u commented Jul 11, 2018

@miq-bot remove_label wip

AllenBW
AllenBW approved these changes Jul 11, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@AllenBW AllenBW left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LG2M, Thanks for bringing the update to the SUI @d-m-u !!

🌮 🐙

chalettu
chalettu approved these changes Jul 11, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@chalettu chalettu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me.

@AllenBW AllenBW merged commit ea0450f into ManageIQ:master Jul 11, 2018
@AllenBW AllenBW self-assigned this Jul 11, 2018
@AllenBW AllenBW added this to the Sprint 90 Ending Jul 16, 2018 milestone Jul 11, 2018
@d-m-u d-m-u mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2018
Merged
@chalettu chalettu mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2018
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@chalettu chalettu chalettu approved these changes

@AllenBW AllenBW AllenBW approved these changes

Assignees

@AllenBW AllenBW

Labels
blocker bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@d-m-u @miq-bot @AllenBW @chalettu