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.

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

Add option set new HTTP proxy as default #3510

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka commented Dec 9, 2024

What changes are you introducing?

Replacing manual configuration of the default content HTTP proxy with a new option to configure the global setting automatically.

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

Documents Katello/katello#11183 and theforeman/foreman#10372

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-28860 (public)

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

  • Hammer argument is not implemented. Only web UI and API.
  • Not sure if there are any other places where an update is needed.

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: N/A

@Lennonka Lennonka force-pushed the add-option-set-default-http-proxy branch from cda1ecb to 425ee8d Compare December 9, 2024 20:32
@Lennonka Lennonka added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Dec 9, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@stejskalleos stejskalleos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🍏 LGTM

@asteflova asteflova 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 Dec 10, 2024
@Lennonka Lennonka added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective and removed Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective labels Dec 10, 2024
@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

Please, keep it open for a QE review.

@Lennonka
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Gauravtalreja1 This procedure is awaiting QE testing. Please, leave a comment. Thank you!

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
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants