Bug 1390028 - [Docs][SHE] Implement feedback for SHE upgrade instructions
Summary: [Docs][SHE] Implement feedback for SHE upgrade instructions
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Documentation
Version: 4.0.3
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
unspecified
Target Milestone: ovirt-4.1.6
: ---
Assignee: Tahlia Richardson
QA Contact: Byron Gravenorst
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-10-30 23:29 UTC by Byron Gravenorst
Modified: 2019-05-07 12:55 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-10-11 01:27:52 UTC
oVirt Team: Docs
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Bugzilla 1373052 0 high CLOSED [Docs][SHE] Additional step and warning required for SHE upgrade procedure 2021-02-22 00:41:40 UTC

Internal Links: 1373052

Description Byron Gravenorst 2016-10-30 23:29:23 UTC
This bug is to implement changes suggested in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380896.

The suggestion to unify RHV-H and RHEL host content will be implemented in a separate bug.

> 2. What is the actual difference between RHV-H and RHEL hosts? If we
> recommend to install `screen` on rhevh, why cannot we install
> `rhevm-appliance` as well? Is there an option to unify the two flows rather
> then duplicating and missing the information? For instance, both flows at
> the end recommend to upgrade RHEL hosts and reinstall RHEV-H. And the
> language is not clear.
> Also, I do not see where we specify recommendation to increase the size of
> the HE storage on RHVH.
> I vote to combine the two sections.
> 
> 3. This note is not really clear. Maybe it is better to come at a later
> location?
> "During the upgrade procedure you will be asked to create a backup of the
> Manager and copy it to the host machine where the upgrade is being
> performed."
> 
> 4. Storage requirements - should be more clear.
> I would also include it in a box with "Important" title or something
> similar. Otherwise the user may start the upgrade without having enough
> space available and fail in the middle. I would recommend also to state
> clearly, that we need twice more space that is used now, for the upgrade.
> 
> 4.1. Imo this phrase is a bit out of context or can be rephrased somehow or
> get more context. Not sure how to make it better:
> "The upgrade procedure creates a backup disk on the self-hosted engine
> storage domain. "

Comment 1 Lucy Bopf 2017-03-02 01:42:52 UTC
Moving back to default assignee to be triaged as resources allow.

Comment 2 Lucy Bopf 2017-07-24 06:52:43 UTC
Assigning to Tahlia for review.

Tahlia, I think we've applied some of these changes in other bugs, but some may still need work.

Adding Byron as QA contact so you can confer.

Comment 3 Tahlia Richardson 2017-09-04 23:33:59 UTC
(In reply to Byron Gravenorst from comment #0)
> This bug is to implement changes suggested in
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380896.
> 
> The suggestion to unify RHV-H and RHEL host content will be implemented in a
> separate bug.
> 
> > 2. What is the actual difference between RHV-H and RHEL hosts? If we
> > recommend to install `screen` on rhevh, why cannot we install
> > `rhevm-appliance` as well? Is there an option to unify the two flows rather
> > then duplicating and missing the information? For instance, both flows at
> > the end recommend to upgrade RHEL hosts and reinstall RHEV-H. And the
> > language is not clear.
> > Also, I do not see where we specify recommendation to increase the size of
> > the HE storage on RHVH.
> > I vote to combine the two sections.

Nacked in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390029#c1

The rest of the items still apply (for 4.0).

Comment 6 Marina Kalinin 2017-10-05 21:35:22 UTC
Hi Tahlia,

Looks good to me. I don't remember at this point what was the initial complaint, but reading the current documentation makes sense. So let's publish it.

Thank you!

Comment 7 Tahlia Richardson 2017-10-06 00:45:55 UTC
Thanks Marina!

Moving to docs QA. 

Preview is in comment 4, MR in comment 5.

Comment 8 Byron Gravenorst 2017-10-09 00:23:59 UTC
Reviewed and merged.


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