Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
Red Hat Satellite engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on Satellite to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "Satellite project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs will be migrated starting at the end of May. If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "Satellite project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
DescriptionStephen Wadeley
2015-12-10 13:05:35 UTC
Document URL:
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Satellite/6.1/html/User_Guide/sect-Red_Hat_Satellite-User_Guide-Using_Content_Views-Filtering_Content.html
Red_Hat_Satellite-User_Guide-6.1-en-US-2-4
Section Number and Name:
"Filtering Content"
Describe the issue:
Currently there is no explanation as to how the Content View filters are parsed. There doesn't appear to be a method in the UI to order the Content View filters, so are they parsed in the order they are added? or are exclude filters parsed before include or vice-versa? How are conflicts in rules resolved? Is it suggested that include/exclude filters not be mixed in the same Content view?
There also isn't any discussion in the documentation with regard to Content View versions and their relationships. Is version 2.0 inclusive of version 1.0 content? or is it a completely different instance of the content so all filters must be redefined? (Diagram figure 6.1 doesn't make this clear).
Can the documentation also possibly include a description as to why a Composite Content View can't contain content from two different Content Views if they contain the same repository? This seems like an artificial constraint.
Additional information:
Source: https://access.redhat.com/discussions/1987953#comment-995113
(In reply to Stephen Wadeley from comment #0)
> Document URL:
>
> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Satellite/6.1/html/
> User_Guide/sect-Red_Hat_Satellite-User_Guide-Using_Content_Views-
> Filtering_Content.html
>
> Red_Hat_Satellite-User_Guide-6.1-en-US-2-4
>
> Section Number and Name:
>
> "Filtering Content"
>
> Describe the issue:
>
> Currently there is no explanation as to how the Content View filters are
> parsed. There doesn't appear to be a method in the UI to order the Content
> View filters, so are they parsed in the order they are added? or are exclude
> filters parsed before include or vice-versa? How are conflicts in rules
> resolved? Is it suggested that include/exclude filters not be mixed in the
> same Content view?
This seems to be already requested here:
Bug 1153650 - Content view filtering process not documented
>
>
> There also isn't any discussion in the documentation with regard to Content
> View versions and their relationships. Is version 2.0 inclusive of version
> 1.0 content? or is it a completely different instance of the content so all
> filters must be redefined? (Diagram figure 6.1 doesn't make this clear).
This seems to be already requested here:
Bug 1203939 - Content Views documentation not clear on the relationship between versions and hosts
>
> Can the documentation also possibly include a description as to why a
> Composite Content View can't contain content from two different Content
> Views if they contain the same repository? This seems like an artificial
> constraint.
>
> Additional information:
>
> Source: https://access.redhat.com/discussions/1987953#comment-995113