removed outdated webhook action from parametrization #15609
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pondrejk
added
TestFailure
|
@pondrejk Do we've any test which can be run in PRT to confirm this removal in stream? and requesting review from @jameerpathan111 since he reviewed upstream PR for removal |
ogajduse
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
jameerpathan111
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
Gauravtalreja1
added
the
Easy Fix :)
hi, what do you mean by confirming the removal? There is a test parametrized by WEBHOOK_EVENTS, I could run it with --collect-only, but I'd say its safe to assume the removed line won't be used... |
jyejare
pushed a commit
to jyejare/robottelo
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 19, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem Statement
"actions.remote_execution.run_host_job_ansible_run_insights_plan_succeeded" no longer around in stream
Solution
confirmed with dev that this is an intentional change, related to theforeman/foreman_ansible#712