Skip to content

Add package persistence for image mode hosts #4605

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
Open
Lennonka wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add package persistence for image mode hosts #4605

Lennonka wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka commented Jan 21, 2026 •
edited
Loading

What changes are you introducing?

Adding a concept and procedures to the image mode hosts chapter in Managing hosts

  • Tracking transient packages on image mode hosts
  • Generating a Containerfile install command to persist those packages on image rebuild

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

New features - demo

SAT-36794 (public)

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: Expected in Foreman 3.18/Katello 4.20

@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 Jan 21, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 21, 2026 •
edited
Loading

The PR preview for d0665da is available at theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-4605.surge.sh

The following output files are affected by this PR:

show diff

show diff as HTML

@Lennonka Lennonka added the Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author label Jan 23, 2026
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Jan 24, 2026
@Lennonka Lennonka requested a review from vsedmik January 24, 2026 10:21
@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lennonka commented Jan 24, 2026

@vsedmik The 3 procedures for command generation need to be verified. TY!

maximiliankolb
maximiliankolb approved these changes Jan 26, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One tech suggestion; style-wise LGTM.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb 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 Jan 26, 2026
ianballou
ianballou reviewed Jan 26, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@ianballou ianballou left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The content looks good! The only thing I think we need here is a note saying that the persistence data will be available in a future version of subscription-manager.

We do not know exactly what version, but it should be in the relatively near future (months scale, not years) since the blocker is SELinux. Pending PR: candlepin/subscription-manager#3684

@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lennonka commented Jan 26, 2026

@ianballou You have discouraged mentioning that due to some email thread on Slack earlier. What has changed?

@ianballou
Copy link
Contributor

ianballou commented Jan 26, 2026

@ianballou You have discouraged mentioning that due to some email thread on Slack earlier. What has changed?

I've always been in favor of having the note.

@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lennonka commented Jan 26, 2026

Discussed off GitHub: The note will go to Release Notes.

@ianballou
Copy link
Contributor

ianballou commented Jan 26, 2026

Back to the note about sub-man not having persistence data yet - @Lennonka and I had a chat and agreed that it would be best as a release note. The release note + the UI warning should cover all bases without too much maintenance worry.

@Lennonka @ianballou
Fix hammer command
8a02809 
Co-authored-by: Ian Ballou <ianballou67@gmail.com>
@Lennonka Lennonka mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2026
Open
qcjames53
qcjames53 suggested changes Jan 26, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@qcjames53 qcjames53 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi! Just a few suggestions; feel free to ignore any of my reword requests.

@pr-processor pr-processor bot added the Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author label Jan 26, 2026
@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lennonka commented Jan 27, 2026 •
edited
Loading

@qcjames53 Hi, Quinn! Thank you for your feedback.
I think that "a Containerfile command" is clear enough to express that we're not generating a whole Containerfile. "install" just further specifies what kind of command it is. Unless we plan generating additional kinds of Containerfile commands in future, "Containerfile command" is sufficient.
I'm going to make a compromise and use "install command" in introductory paragraphs, but keep the rest of it short & sweet.

@Lennonka @qcjames53
Apply suggestions from review
d0665da 
Co-authored-by: Quinn James <35753203+qcjames53@users.noreply.github.com>
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Jan 27, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ianballou ianballou ianballou left review comments

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb maximiliankolb approved these changes

@vsedmik vsedmik Awaiting requested review from vsedmik

+1 more reviewer

@qcjames53 qcjames53 qcjames53 requested changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Needs re-review Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@Lennonka @ianballou @maximiliankolb @qcjames53 @vsedmik