Pulp: Issueshttps://pulp.plan.io/https://pulp.plan.io/favicon.ico2021-06-01T21:12:19ZPulp
Planio Pulp - Story #8846 (NEW): As a pulp_installer user, I do not need to use the latest micro release...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/88462021-06-01T21:12:19Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>Basically, this means that pulp_installer 3.14.0 (or possibly 3.13.1 / 3.13.2) will be able to install pulpcore 3.14.z .</p>
<p>The benefit for users is that they will not need to always have the latest micro version of pulp_installer.</p>
<p>And the benefit to the pulp team is that we will not need to do a pulp_installer micro release for every pulpcore micro release.</p>
<p>This is a variation of the 1 year old proposal for versions/branches in pulp_installer, and a variation of the specific micro release policy we implemented originally in <a class="issue tracker-3 status-1 priority-6 priority-default child parent" title="Story: As a user, I can download & run a version of the ansible installer that a specific version of Pulp 3 (NEW)" href="https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5618">#5618</a>.</p>
<p>Reference from <a class="issue tracker-3 status-1 priority-6 priority-default child parent" title="Story: As a user, I can download & run a version of the ansible installer that a specific version of Pulp 3 (NEW)" href="https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5618">#5618</a>:</p>
<pre><code> * Original discussion:
* [mikedep333's proposal](https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/pull/203#issue-361269733)
* [bmbouter's couter-proposal to do micro-versioned releases](https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/pull/203#issuecomment-577903411)
* [mikedep333's agreement/details for micro-versioned releases](https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/pull/203#issuecomment-579450153)
</code></pre> Pulp - Story #8701 (NEW): As a pulp_installer user, I can use the full logic to add repos to the ...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/87012021-05-05T12:59:40Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>As mentioned in <a class="issue tracker-1 status-11 priority-6 priority-default closed" title="Issue: pulp_installer fails to install redis due to no EPEL7 (CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE)" href="https://pulp.plan.io/issues/7773">#7773</a> , we should refactor our logic to add repos to the system (in a robust & configurable manner) into another role like <code>pulp_repos</code>.</p>
<p>I propose the following design:</p>
<ol>
<li>This is a dependency role. pulp_common, pulp_redis, pulp_database, will all depend on it.</li>
<li>When a role like pulp_common depends on it, it passes variables like <code>__pulp_repos_epel: true</code> to denote which repos the role needs. It passes variables via roles/pulp_common/meta/main.yml : <code>dependencies:</code>
</li>
<li>If a user wants to disable the logic to add the repo (if they added it manually), they'll pass a variable like <code>pulp_repos_epel: false</code> to disable it.</li>
<li>Existing variables for configuring how we add the repos to the system, like <code>epel_release_packages</code>, should still used.</li>
</ol>
<p>This logic is found in:</p>
<ul>
<li>roles/pulp_common/tasks/ambiguously-named-repo.yml</li>
<li>roles/pulp_common/tasks/repos.yml</li>
</ul> Pulp - Story #8491 (NEW): As a user I only download needed collections dependencieshttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/84912021-03-31T20:31:18Zfao89
<p>As some modules are leaving ansible core to collections, we need to declare collections as dependencies so ansible-galaxy can install them.</p>
<p>pulp_installer provides a set of roles, and the user may not use all the roles, pulp_database role needs community.postgresql for example.</p>
<p>How can we deal with these "conditional dependencies"?
"if the user gets pulp_dabase role install community.postgresql else don't install it"</p>
<p><a href="https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/pull/567" class="external">https://github.com/pulp/pulp_installer/pull/567</a></p> Pulp - Story #8086 (NEW): pulp_installer should use latest version of pip to install packageshttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/80862021-01-13T13:42:45Zdkliban@redhat.com
<p>The newer versions of pip include an improved dependency resolution mechanism. The pulp_installer needs a task added to upgrade pip before installing any pulp packages.</p> Pulp - Task #7724 (NEW): Improve runtime of new installation of Pulphttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/77242020-10-20T14:06:47Zbmbouterbmbouter@redhat.com
<p>The request to make the installer go faster</p>
<pre><code>A tower standalone install with automation hub takes about ~40 mins. Which is almost more than double of a normal
Tower install. It seems the most of the time we spent is on pulp-common role. Is there anything we are planning to do
in terms of making it little faster (not running same tasks many time, which pulp common role does) ?
</code></pre> Pulp - Story #7689 (NEW): As a user I want my socket to be backed up by a systemd implementationhttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76892020-10-12T13:25:04Zspredzy
<p>As a user I want my socket to be backed up by a systemd implementation.</p>
<p>Under its current form, the installer allows one to use unix domain socket, but not to configure them with a native systemd implementation. This is a RFE for this.</p> Pulp - Task #7668 (NEW): remove pid files from the systemd service fileshttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76682020-10-07T17:05:32Zdkliban@redhat.com
<p>Systemd does not need explicitly defined pid files to keep track of the services. We should make a change the systemd service files similar to the change here: <a href="https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-pulpcore/commit/b3b7c133c513dd2c30b00a81e64b2bb33ca92397" class="external">https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-pulpcore/commit/b3b7c133c513dd2c30b00a81e64b2bb33ca92397</a></p> Pulp - Task #7638 (NEW): Fix ansible_python_interpreter issues in pulp_installerhttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/76382020-10-01T18:03:57Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>There are 3 minor / potential issues pertaining to this.</p> Pulp - Task #7482 (NEW): pulp_installer change(s) for Recommended installation layouthttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/74822020-09-09T14:45:55Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>See parent task.</p>
<p>We will just tell pulp_installer users to stop the services before upgrading, instead of the symlink. We will still perform the directory move though.</p> Pulp - Task #7281 (NEW): Update docs to state that installer can only install one cluster at a timehttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/72812020-08-05T14:39:19Zdkliban@redhat.com
<p>The documentation needs to have a "Known limitations" section. One of the items should state that that the installer can only install one Pulp cluster at a time.</p> Pulp - Story #7247 (NEW): As a pulp_installer developer-user, the pulp_rpm signing service will b...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/72472020-07-30T19:56:47Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>The current way pulp_rpm's signing service needs to be installed is a temporary.</p>
<p>So let's add the current ansible-based solution I already developed. I developed it as part of the selinux el8 dev env, and it's in the pulp_devel (not meant for end users.)</p> Pulp - Story #7007 (NEW): As a user, I do not have to worry about Pulp being accidentally upgrade...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/70072020-06-18T15:40:06Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>We should pursue using dnf versionlock to accomplish this.</p>
<p>This is needed because handlers/tasks "Run database migrations" will not be run if users run <code>dnf update</code>. Pulp would be broken until users re-run the installer.</p> Pulp - Task #6904 (NEW): Document using https://pypi.org/project/pulpcore-releases/ for the insta...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/69042020-06-03T15:25:07Zbmbouterbmbouter@redhat.com
<p>The Pulp Dependency Checker is a great tool to show compatibility between a pulpcore version and various concerns.</p>
<p>We should do three things:</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>Move the pdc tool to the pulp org.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Add a very obvious link to the pulp_installer docs recommending users to use the tool to determine pulpcore and plugin compatibility</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Update the error message that the installer puts out when the pre-flight check fails. Have that error message point users to specifically check which plugins are compatible with the pulpcore version the installer is trying to install.</p>
</li>
</ol> Pulp - Task #6798 (NEW): Document the new guidelines for plugin installation logichttps://pulp.plan.io/issues/67982020-05-21T18:47:54Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>There are 3 places they could be:</p>
<ol>
<li>A role in a separate git repo and on galaxy.</li>
<li>A separate role in the pulp_installer repo (pulp_rpm will be this.)</li>
<li>Conditional logic within the pulp_installer's other roles.</li>
</ol> Pulp - Story #6797 (ASSIGNED): [epic] As a user, I can consume all the plugin prereq roles in the...https://pulp.plan.io/issues/67972020-05-21T18:45:22Zmdepaulo@redhat.com
<p>pulp_rpm_prerequisites exists because the installer has had a plugin neutral policy.</p>
<p>This policy was for very long misunderstood: It's not about avoiding favoritism to any plugins, it's about not tying the installer (which is tied to pulpcore releases) to plugin releases. So that say pulpcore 3.3 logic would be in pulp_installer 3.3 release, and so that pulp_cardboardbox 0.7 logic would be in the pulp_cardboardbox_prerequisites 0.7 role.</p>
<p>The team now agrees that this policy is counter-productive because:</p>
<ol>
<li>Having a role in a separate repo (not part of the pulp_installer collection) is extra work for developers, and for users.</li>
<li>The only plugin that currently needs a prereq role, pulp_rpm, has version numbers and releases that correspond to pulpcore releases. pulp_rpm 3.3.z needs pulpcore 3.3.z, etc. So the pulp_rpm specific installation logic can be safely bundled in pulp_installer 99% of the time.</li>
</ol>