Bug 1243549
| Summary: | We need to call out only Sat 6 has channels with access to JWS 3.0 and point to the KB solution for info on Sat 5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [JBoss] JBoss Enterprise Web Server 2 | Reporter: | Dawn Eisner <deisner> |
| Component: | unspecified | Assignee: | Lucas Costi <lcosti> |
| Status: | CLOSED CANTFIX | QA Contact: | Michal Karm Babacek <mbabacek> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 3.0.0 | CC: | dmichael, jdoyle, lcosti, weli, xdmoon |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2015-07-17 00:16:03 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
JWS3 Issues are being tracked in JIRA now, cloned a new issue there as https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JWS-187 The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days |
On Jul 14, 2015, at 9:34 AM, Ash Westbrook <awestbro> wrote: Cliff has given us a workaround for the current Satellite 5 customers, but the documentation still needs an update. Specially the instructions here: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_JBoss_Web_Server/3/html/Installation_Guide/sect-RPM_Installation.html It should point to the supported version of Satellite and possibly also to a KCS for the Satellite 5 workaround. Added Adam Strong to the thread for his thoughts on this. Happy to request the documentation update from my team and agree with your thoughts, Ash. We can move this request to Bugzilla so that we can iron out the details there. I’ve included our Content Strategist (Dawn Eisner) and interim Documentation Program Manager (David Michael) on the thread. Can one of you create the BZ and send the link to this thread? Interested parties can follow along there. --Ash ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jimmy Wilson" <jawilson> To: "Greg Sterling" <gsterlin>, "Martin Klika" <mklika> Cc: "Brian M. Hamrick" <bhamrick>, "Ash Westbrook" <awestbro>, "Cliff Perry" <cperry>, "Chris O'Brien" <cobrien>, "Xixi D'Moon" <xdmoon>, "Chris Wells" <cwells>, "Jay Howell" <jhowell>, "Todd Warner" <taw>, "John Jong Bae KO" <jko>, "Suhas Prabhu" <suprabhu>, "Paresh Mutha" <pmutha>, "Coty Sutherland" <csutherl>, "Markus Schreier" <mschreie> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 12:42:38 PM Subject: Re: JWS 3.0 / RHSM Only / Unexpected Consequences // ESC-022963 Hi Greg, I think we are just trying to understand the situation, and I think your note clarifies things. Thank you very much for your reply! I do not believe we are interested in requesting channels, etc from the RHN Channel review board at this time. Right now, there are 5 [1] known JWS customers that are affected, and at least one of them (maybe two) have indicated that they will move to Satellite 6 which is the ultimate behavior we want. I do think we will monitor the concern from JWS customers, and if we get a significant amount of negative feed back, we may initiate such a request. Jay and/or Ash, and I missing anything here? [1] https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1478193 Jimmy On 07/13/2015 09:18 AM, Greg Sterling wrote: Have you put a request before the RHN Channel review board? I'm assuming that the issue is that you want new RHN channels in order to deliver the latest version of JWS 3.0 to Sat5 customers. The reason for the ISO image import is because it is the only way for Red Hat to stop creating new RHN channels, but to constinue to support Sat5 customers that exists today. It's possible the document isn't up to date, but I'm not seeing any request having been made at https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1010737 for JWS 3.0. If a request hasn't gone in to discuss RHN Classic channels, I'm afraid there isn't much that I can do to help here until a request has been made. If a request has been made, please send myself and rhn-channel-request-list the request again and I'll make sure to help get pressure to make the review happen. If the request hasn't been put in front of the RHN Channel review board, please follow the links listed below for the mojo docs and templates. RHN Channel review email - rhn-channel-request-list RHN Statement - https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-979589 Request Template - https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1010719 The reason that RHEL7 does not have this problem is that they shipped RHEL7 before the RHN Channel review board was in place, and continue to use the same channels to ship their product. Existing products on RHN can continue to ship content to RHN using their existing channels. However, the RHN channels are not visible to customers through the RHN portal. They are technically there, but they are just not exposed to any product other than Sat5. The RHN Channel review board is trying very hard to ensure that we don't create new channels in RHN that would cause us to have to support RHN longer than we are already committed to supporting it. I have no control over what products are and are not allowed to create new RHN channels. If you do not like the process put in place or feel that you need to raise this issue due to requesting an exception, please send an email to Jay Ferrandini (my boss) or Katrinka McCallum (Jay's boss). If you haven't tried to go through the new RHN Channel review board process, I would hope that you will read the documentation provided and please try to do that. Thanks! Greg +++ Martin Klika [12/07/15 07:14 -0400]: Hi all, Can I get an update here please. We still have cases with customers pending here. Are we doing anything to have JWS 3.0 available via Sat5 or there's definite NO which we should communicate to customers? Thanks in advance for info! Martin Klika Manager - Technical Support Global Support Services (GSS) Email: mklika Direct: +42 (0) 532294904 Mobile: +42 (0) 736 650 824 Extension: 8262904 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jimmy Wilson" <jawilson> To: "Greg Sterling" <gsterlin> Cc: "Ash Westbrook" <awestbro>, "Cliff Perry" <cperry>, "Chris O'Brien" <cobrien>, "Xixi D'Moon" <xdmoon>, "Chris Wells" <cwells>, "Jay Howell" <jhowell>, "Todd Warner" <taw>, "Martin Klika" <mklika>, "John Jong Bae KO" <jko>, "Suhas Prabhu" <suprabhu>, "Paresh Mutha" <pmutha>, "Coty Sutherland" <csutherl> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 8:52:48 PM Subject: Re: JWS 3.0 / RHSM Only / Unexpected Consequences Greg, Others have indicated that RHEL7 does not have this problem. Satellite 5 customers can update RHEL 7 distributions even though they have not imported ISOs. Yet, seemingly, a RHN classic distribution of RHEL7 does not exist. Can you help me understand what I'm missing here? Jimmy On 06/19/2015 06:41 AM, Greg Sterling wrote: Finally digging back out of email again, slowly but surely Not pushing content to RHN isn't just an RCM policy as there are more than one group that is heavily impacted by content that is distributed to RHN. If you haven't seen the mojo docs that explains the process for having RHN channels created here are a few useful links. RHN Channel review email - rhn-channel-request-list RHN Statement - https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-979589 Request Template - https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1010719 I believe that the RHN Statement link also links off to at least one google doc presentation that has additional information. So while it is true that we have become the gate keepers in a way for this since we are typically the first point of contact for an RHN channel request, there are other teams in DevOps, CEE and others that require additional work for doing things like setting up the customer portal, entitlements and such. Setting up and configuring RHN is really less about the work though and more about how much longer we need to keep maintaining the service due to product life cycles. If you have specific issues or concerns and would like JWS to have consideration for getting new RHN channels please feel free to raise the new information, risks and conderns to rhn-channel-request-list and if you feel that you are not getting a satisfactory response please raise the issues and concerns to Katrinka. To my understanding, it is correct that at this time customers who are on Sat5 will need to import ISO images to get content into their environment once the content is no longer distributed through RHN. This is not a great scenario because it now means that we will have to potentially be spinning a large number of ISO images to keep the ISO content in sync with CDN in order to support Sat5 customers. This is not an ideal situation obviously. Thanks! Greg +++ Jimmy Wilson [15/06/15 11:34 -0500]: Cliff, Based on the small(ish) number of customers involved for JWS, it may very well NOT belong on the priority list, but I think a better understanding of the policy decisions from release engineering (Greg?) will be good information to have. Also outstanding is an understanding of why a SAT5 customer can already do this with RHEL7 (it appears), and it does not seem to require the ISO build you spoke of... I'm curious why that's not possible with JWS 3. Jimmy On 06/15/2015 09:44 AM, Ash Westbrook wrote: Adding the global SBR sponsors to the thread for visibility. --Ash ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff Perry" <cperry> To: "Jimmy Wilson" <jawilson>, "Chris O'Brien" <cobrien>, "Greg Sterling" <gsterlin>, "Xixi D'Moon" <xdmoon>, "Chris Wells" <cwells> Cc: "Jay Howell" <jhowell>, "Ash Westbrook" <awestbro>, "Todd Warner" <taw> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 6:29:46 PM Subject: Re: JWS 3.0 / RHSM Only / Unexpected Consequences On 12/06/15 22:05, Jimmy Wilson wrote: JWS 3.0 released on RHSM only in part because of a 'policy' from release engineering that stipulated moving away from RHN classic. Since JSW 3 is a new major release, making this change seemed a natural fit, but there were some complications that were not fully understood by the middleware product team: * RHEL 6 customers can not use JSW 3.0 by default * Sat 5 customers can not use JSW 3.0 at all Right now, we have a handful of customers that are unhappy with their predicament. We have captured this issue in KCS [1], and we linked all of the appropriate cases. Apparently, even though RHEL7 was released in a similar way, there is a workaround involving a 'SAM machine' that allows Sat 5 customers to use it [2]. That same workaround does not appear to exist for JWS 3. It is not clear why that is the case. Would it be possible to provide this same ability moving forward? In addition, can we discuss in this thread the release engineering policy and how it led to this situation? What other products will be affected down the line? There are definitely going to be new middleware products, but what about others? [1] https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1478193 [2] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Subscription_Management/1/html-single/Using_Subscription_Asset_Manager/index.html Jimmy Hi Jimmy, I don't know if all the right people are on CC if you wish to discuss RCM policy. I did add Todd Warner to cc though, since he is tasked currently to help drive forward a solution for customers in this exact situation. We have been working on documentation/process where a Satellite 5 customer can easily download a Satellite 6 Content ISO and import the content for a product into Satellite 5 to then consume. This is given an overview here: https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1030281 I'm not familiar with the JWS product, nor the PM/Engineering team who manage it, but ideally requests for prioritization would come from them. As you see, Jboss isn't high on the list right now of backlog to tackle in getting them generated and published on the customer portal. RCM own the generation of this content, we can influence what is added as they slowly expand, automate and roll out this new content type: https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1017468 So, since it is 11:25pm here on a Friday - I'm going to cut myself off and say that I hope this at least helps in giving direction. Regards, Cliff Thanks, Adam Strong Manager, Customer Content Services North America Customer Experience & Engagement (CEE) Red Hat, Inc