Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move DR overview and reuse it in Admin #3614

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova commented Jan 24, 2025

What changes are you introducing?

  • Moving disaster recovery overview from a separate assembly in the Planning guide to the deployment path assembly
  • Including the disaster recovery assembly in the Admin guide
  • Renaming the disaster recovery assembly

Except for the renaming, the content stays the same.

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

As I started documenting the first of the DR scenarios (#3615), this structure seemed to work better.

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

I'm not entirely sure about the placement in the Admin guide and want to use this PR to discuss it.

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 3.13/Katello 4.15 (EL9 only)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only; orcharhino 7.0 on EL8+EL9)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • Foreman 3.8/Katello 4.10
  • Foreman 3.7/Katello 4.9 (Satellite 6.14)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.7.

@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

@apinnick What do you think is the best place for disaster planning + testing + recovery? This PR places the assembly in the Admin guide -- at the very end because considering how long that guide is, I think it's kind of pointless to play with the order of the chapters.

I considered a separate guide and.. I don't know.. maybe?

(To explain a bit more: For now, this is still just an assembly with an overview. I will be adding detailed procedures for each of the DR scenarios. You can see a preview of the first scenario here if it helps #3615. Also, just in case it isn't clear from the PR: My plan is to add the scenarios to Admin only, not to Planning.)

@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Let's skip tech review because this just moves things around.

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Jan 24, 2025
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 Not yet reviewed tech review done No issues from the technical perspective
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant