Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
This project is now read‑only. Starting Monday, February 2, please use Jira Cloud for all bug tracking management.

Bug 1490188

Summary: properly describe what release_version var should be set to during upgrade
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage Reporter: Shinobu KINJO <skinjo>
Component: Ceph-AnsibleAssignee: seb
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Vasishta <vashastr>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: 2.3CC: adeza, anharris, aschoen, ceph-eng-bugs, gmeno, hnallurv, kdreyer, nthomas, sankarshan, seb, skinjo
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: 3.0   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: RHEL: ceph-ansible-3.0.0-0.1.rc9.el7cp Ubuntu: ceph-ansible_3.0.0~rc9-2redhat1 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-12-05 23:42:56 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 Shinobu KINJO 2017-09-11 04:46:04 UTC 
Description of problem:
In < rolling_update.yml >, there is a comment below:

 # /!\ DO NOT FORGET TO CHANGE THE RELEASE VERSION FIRST! /!\

This makes users who are going to achieve minor version upgrade (e.g., 2.1 to 2.2) confused because there is no descriptive comment.

Which file(s) is/are this message pointing to?
Comment 2 seb 2017-09-13 21:38:35 UTC 
There is no such things as release version for RHCS but I agree this is confusing.
Comment 3 seb 2017-09-15 13:09:31 UTC 
Since I haven't received any response from you, I consider that what I did in the PR is correct, so moving ahead with this one.
Comment 6 Harish NV Rao 2017-09-19 14:58:44 UTC 
@Seb, please let us know what is changed and steps to test.
Comment 7 seb 2017-09-19 15:10:05 UTC 
Harish, nothing to verify, perhaps just read the header of rolling_update.yml and make sure it's comprehensive.
Comment 9 Shinobu KINJO 2017-09-21 02:25:05 UTC 
(In reply to seb from comment #3)
> Since I haven't received any response from you, I consider that what I did
> in the PR is correct, so moving ahead with this one.

Sorry for the delay. That's much better.
Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2017-12-05 23:42:56 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:3387