Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 2230284

Summary: RHOSP installation document should mention the need to using TUS repositories
Product: Red Hat OpenStack Reporter: Eric Nothen <enothen>
Component: documentationAssignee: Irina <igallagh>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: RHOS Documentation Team <rhos-docs>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 16.2 (Train)CC: igallagh, jbreitwe, jslagle
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Triaged
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-10-10 13:42:41 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 Eric Nothen 2023-08-09 08:58:49 UTC
Description of problem:

The "Director Installation and Usage" document, section 3.3 step #2 [0] is still mentioning EUS repositories. 

Since 06/2023 this document should mention or at least have a note explaining that TUS repositories are needed instead. I don't think this change is "optional", as a customer installing RHOSP 16 after 06/2023 would be getting the latest version of images but not the latest version of packages.

This change was already done in the "Keeping Red Hat OpenStack Platform Updated" document [1].


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
16.2


[0] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/16.2/html-single/director_installation_and_usage/index#enabling-repositories-for-the-undercloud
[1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openstack_platform/16.2/html-single/keeping_red_hat_openstack_platform_updated/index#proc_changing-to-extended-update-support-eus-repositories_preparing-minor-update

Comment 1 James Slagle 2023-09-29 18:54:40 UTC
Agree that the repo content from [1] should be used to update the content in [0].