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the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.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.
Description of problem:
Hammer content-view remove version, erm doesnt!
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Satellite 6.1 beta
How reproducible:
100%
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a number of versions of a content view
2. for i in 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 21; do hammer content-view remove-version --organization myorg --name SOE --content-view-version "$i"; done
(it reports each one as removed)
3. Check the UI - they are still there
4. Run the same command as step 2 again, it again reports they have been removed
Actual results:
Content view versions remain after informing you they were removed
Expected results:
The version of the content view to be gone
Additional info:
[root@sat61 ~]# for i in 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 21; do hammer content-view remove-version --organization myorg --name SOE --content-view-version "$i"; done
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
[root@sat61beta ~]# for i in 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 21; do hammer content-view remove-version --organization myorg --name SOE --content-view-version "$i"; done
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
The component version has been removed
# rpm -qa | grep hammer
rubygem-hammer_cli-0.1.4.10-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_import-0.10.6.5-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_foreman-0.1.4.11-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_katello-0.0.7.10-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_foreman_tasks-0.0.3.4-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_foreman_discovery-0.0.1.9-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_foreman_bootdisk-0.1.2.7-1.el7sat.noarch
rubygem-hammer_cli_gutterball-0.0.1.2-1.el7sat.noarch
Comment 1RHEL Program Management
2015-05-13 10:43:00 UTC
Since this issue was entered in Red Hat Bugzilla, the release flag has been
set to ? to ensure that it is properly evaluated for this release.
Note: the content view version removal is an asynchronous task; therefore, the following text should be changed:
"The component version has been removed"
to something like:
"The component version has been schedule for removal"
In addition, it would be useful to provide the user with the task ID, so that they may monitor it's completion.
(In reply to Brad Buckingham from comment #3)
> Note: the content view version removal is an asynchronous task; therefore,
> the following text should be changed:
> "The component version has been removed"
>
> to something like:
> "The component version has been schedule for removal"
>
> In addition, it would be useful to provide the user with the task ID, so
> that they may monitor it's completion.
Does this mean the CV versions *do* get removed, but not straight away?
I need to know exactly what happens before I create a rel note. If the text is misleading I can say that, but if the CV version never gets removed, I need to say that as well.
thanks
Since the other bug has 3 ACKs and blocker flag, I'm closing this (earlier) bug rather than the other one.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1320146 ***