Skip to content

Do not use ifeval macros for Client OS - #5087

Open
maximiliankolb wants to merge 1 commit into
theforeman:masterfrom
ATIX-AG:remove_ifeval_for_client_os
Open

Do not use ifeval macros for Client OS#5087
maximiliankolb wants to merge 1 commit into
theforeman:masterfrom
ATIX-AG:remove_ifeval_for_client_os

Conversation

@maximiliankolb

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What changes are you introducing?

Reduce number of "ifeval" macros.

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

It is easier to look at the macro than finding out what the value of "client-os" is for certain builds or assemblies.

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

Contributor checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 3.19/Katello 4.21
  • Foreman 3.18/Katello 4.20 (Satellite 6.19; orcharhino 7.9)
  • Foreman 3.17/Katello 4.19
  • Foreman 3.16/Katello 4.18 (Satellite 6.18; orcharhino 7.6, 7.7, and 7.8)
  • Foreman 3.15/Katello 4.17
  • Foreman 3.14/Katello 4.16 (Satellite 6.17; orcharhino 7.4; orcharhino 7.5)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.14.

It is easier to look at the macro than finding out what the value of
"client-os" is for certain builds or assemblies.
@github-actions github-actions Bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Jul 21, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing Not yet reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant