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
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1153650 ***