Bug 1377162 - [Docs] Unpublish the installation content for the Optimizer
Summary: [Docs] Unpublish the installation content for the Optimizer
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Documentation
Version: 4.0.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ovirt-3.6.10
: ---
Assignee: rhev-docs@redhat.com
QA Contact: rhev-docs@redhat.com
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1373813
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-09-19 02:43 UTC by Lucy Bopf
Modified: 2019-05-07 13:13 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-01-31 12:05:19 UTC
oVirt Team: Docs
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Lucy Bopf 2016-09-19 02:43:31 UTC
From the first z-stream release of RHV 4.0 (4.0.4), the Optimizer, which was previously provided as a Technology Preview, is supported.

The instructions from https://access.redhat.com/articles/1289123 must be added to the RHV 4.0 Administration Guide, and the TP notice removed for 4.0.

Martin Sivak confirmed that the steps for 4.0 should be the same as in the article:

"The 4.0 optimizer (0.11)  is installed slightly differently internally, but the steps should be still compatible with 0.8 as everything should be handled by the RPM itself."

Comment 4 Lucy Bopf 2016-12-20 04:42:27 UTC
This bug now tracks the removal of https://access.redhat.com/articles/1289123 and any other references to the Optimizer.

Yaniv, for all versions, or just 4.0?

Comment 5 Yaniv Lavi 2016-12-20 11:46:50 UTC
Can you please reply to this?

Comment 6 Yaniv Kaul 2016-12-20 12:34:02 UTC
(In reply to Yaniv Dary from comment #5)
> Can you please reply to this?

All.

Comment 7 Lucy Bopf 2017-01-11 04:20:33 UTC
I've now removed links to this article from our documentation splash pages for 3.5, 3.6, and 4.0.

To start with, I have retired the article, rather than removing it entirely. Yaniv K or Yaniv D, do you see any benefit to leaving the article up with a notice explaining that the feature has been removed, in case an internal user searches for information on the Optimizer? If not, I'll delete the article.

Comment 8 Yaniv Kaul 2017-01-11 05:51:48 UTC
Not sure what the difference is between retirement and removal. I'm good either way.

Comment 9 Lucy Bopf 2017-01-31 11:29:59 UTC
(In reply to Yaniv Kaul from comment #8)
> Not sure what the difference is between retirement and removal. I'm good
> either way.

Retiring it means that a logged in internal user can still find it; for example, someone from support could search for details on the Optimizer, and find the article explaining that it's unsupported. Removing means that it's simply gone from the Customer Portal. Any preference?

Comment 10 Yaniv Kaul 2017-01-31 11:31:17 UTC
(In reply to Lucy Bopf from comment #9)
> (In reply to Yaniv Kaul from comment #8)
> > Not sure what the difference is between retirement and removal. I'm good
> > either way.
> 
> Retiring it means that a logged in internal user can still find it; for
> example, someone from support could search for details on the Optimizer, and
> find the article explaining that it's unsupported. Removing means that it's
> simply gone from the Customer Portal. Any preference?

Retire please.

Comment 11 Lucy Bopf 2017-01-31 12:05:19 UTC
Thanks, Yaniv. No problem. The article is retired.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.