Bug 1387890

Summary:	[RFE] More information on Scenarios
Product:	Red Hat Satellite	Reporter:	jnikolak
Component:	Docs Architecture Guide	Assignee:	Russell Dickenson <rdickens>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Stephen Wadeley <swadeley>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	6.2.2	CC:	adahms, ehelms, rdickens, sbream, swadeley, zhunting
Target Milestone:	Unspecified	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Release:	Unused
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-02-13 23:15:02 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:

Description jnikolak 2016-10-23 04:45:43 UTC

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-satellite/6.2/paged/installation-guide/

Satellite 6.2.2 now uses scenarios but there are a few questions..

1) Why do we use scenarios

2) What is the impact of not using scenarios
i.e running installer without any scenario option

3) If customer is behind a proxy why can't these settings work with the scenario --capsule

4) satellite-installer --compare-scenarios -S  capsule
What does it mean N/A in some of the modules.
Does that mean that katello, and openscap cannot be run from a capsule

and only this Enabled modules (see below)
satellite-installer --compare-scenarios -S  capsule
Overview of modules used in the scenarios (Satellite -> Capsule):
capsule                                           : ENABLED   -> ENABLED
certs                                             : ENABLED   -> ENABLED
foreman_proxy                                     : ENABLED   -> ENABLED
foreman_proxy_plugin_pulp                         : ENABLED   -> ENABLED


5) The following directory appears to be associated with scenarios
/etc/foreman-installer/scenarios.d
Can we have more information of what the yaml files do?

Comment 1 Andrew Dahms 2016-11-08 23:35:42 UTC

Assigning to Russell for review.

Russell - perhaps a good addition to the Architecture Guide, the Installation Guide, or both?

Comment 5 Andrew Dahms 2017-01-12 12:25:33 UTC

Changing the QA contact to Stephen.

Comment 13 Stephen Wadeley 2017-01-28 10:56:22 UTC

Hello

See also:
Bug 1288539 - [RFE] Provide man pages for all Satellite 6 commands and config files

Comment 16 Steve Bream 2017-01-31 01:49:56 UTC

Stephen,

in reply to Comment 10, I agree that we shouldn't put this table right in the beginning of a task. Where the user needs the information in the table to complete the task, we should integrate the information they need in the step in which they need it. Where larger decisions need to be made, this information would be better suited to the Architecture Guide than the Installation Guide. From a design standpoint they should know what scenario they want to use before the begin installation.

Reorganizing the Installation Guide is on the list of work for 6.3. As part of that work I want to look at moving all of the installation decisions to the Architecture Guide, perhaps including a worksheet where the user can record the options they need to use to install their chosen scenario.