Skip to content

Conversation

aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova commented Sep 25, 2025

What changes are you introducing?

Updating the Quickstart guide with a procedure for a containerized Foreman on EL+Katello server installation. This includes:

  • Implementing tabs so that users can switch between the old installation method and the containerized method.
  • Reviewing the guide's abstract and module introductions to accommodate the new content.
  • Merging required packages with the procedure to run the installer (to make the guide shorter and also, with foremanctl, only one pkg is required so a separate module seems a bit too much).

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

https://github.com/theforeman/foremanctl

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

The containerized deployment is only available for Foreman on EL+Katello now.

The foremanctl conditionals around AsciiDoc tabs might seem a bit too complex but they are only temporary. When the containerized deployment is available for all flavors, we'll be able to remove them.

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 Sep 25, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova removed 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 Sep 25, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova force-pushed the foremanctl-quickstart branch 2 times, most recently from 317d0d5 to a0ba67f Compare September 25, 2025 18:10
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova force-pushed the foremanctl-quickstart branch 2 times, most recently from 7e831d8 to c04b539 Compare September 25, 2025 18:31
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2025 18:43
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective testing done No issues from the functional perspective labels Sep 25, 2025
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

This is now ready for review.

@evgeni Can you please take a look?

Dear writers, can one of you please review as well?

Copy link
Member

@evgeni evgeni left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TECH ACK!

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective and removed Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective labels Sep 29, 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.

Style-wise LGTM, but I'm a tad confused about the foremanctl attribute.
Do we already know whether the command will be branded in downstream, e.g. satellitectl for Satellite?

In the new installing guide, we intentionally used an attribute that wasn't named "foremanctl" for conditionals. I recommend doing the same in any other guides that are going to be extended for the new installer.

@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Style-wise LGTM, but I'm a tad confused about the foremanctl attribute. Do we already know whether the command will be branded in downstream, e.g. satellitectl for Satellite?

The current expectation is that the command won't be branded.

In the new installing guide, we intentionally used an attribute that wasn't named "foremanctl" for conditionals. I recommend doing the same in any other guides that are going to be extended for the new installer.

In 50a8276 (PR where I'm developing the new installation guide) I now have a commit that simplifies the attribute from installer-foremanctl to plain foremanctl. This is why I'm also using foremanctl in the Quickstart. I'm explaining my reasoning in the commit message. Please do let me know if there are further concerns!

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.

Thank you for the clarification. All good!

@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 Sep 30, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova merged commit 268c9bf into theforeman:master Sep 30, 2025
10 checks passed
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova deleted the foremanctl-quickstart branch September 30, 2025 13:46
aneta-petrova added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2025
* Remove unused IDs
* Add foremanctl install and implement tabs
* Ensure tabs with foremanctl are shown only for Katello
* Turn a procedure into a snippet
* Add CPU min installation requirement
* Define min CPU req with an attribute
* Add CPU requirement also to Puppet-based install

(cherry picked from commit 268c9bf)
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Merged to "master" and cherry-picked:

44eae9c..a4bd827 3.16 -> 3.16

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 tech review done No issues from the technical perspective testing done No issues from the functional perspective
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants