1. Proposed title of this feature request

[RFE] Add optional lifecycle environment option to hammer command "hammer content-view info"

2. Who is the customer behind the request?

sysmgmt team

3. What is the nature and description of the request?

I'd like to request that the option "--lifecycle-environment" be added to the following hammer command, as an optional feature:

# hammer content-view info

4. Why does the customer need this? (List the business requirements here)

Sometimes customers ask us for help figuring out why their hosts can't see certain content provided by their content views.  We can run "subscription-manager identity" on the host to see both the content view and the lifecycle environment to which the host is registered.

On the Satellite side, we can run "hammer content-view info --name 'CV_NAME'" to get information about the contents of the latest version of the content view, we can run "hammer content-view version list" to get a list of content view versions and their associated lifecycles, and we can run "hammer content-view version info --id IDNUM" to get the contents of one of the items in the version list.

What we can't do is to run one hammer command to get the repositories that exist in the version of a content view that has been promoted to a particular lifecycle environment.  That complicates our instructions to the customers, and can lengthen the time required to gather information from them.

5. How would the customer like to achieve this? (List the functional requirements here)

It would probably require updates to the foreman API.

6. For each functional requirement listed, specify how Red Hat and the customer can test to confirm the requirement is successfully implemented.

Run the new command and compare the results to what we see in the web interface.

7. Is there already an existing RFE upstream or in Red Hat Bugzilla?

no

8. Does the customer have any specific time-line dependencies and which release would they like to target (i.e. RHEL5, RHEL6)?

no

9. Is the sales team involved in this request and do they have any additional input?

no

10. List any affected packages or components.

foreman

11. Would the customer be able to assist in testing this functionality if implemented?

yes