Foreman 1.2 bugs

Yesterday we merged in the last batch of features to develop that are
intended to form Foreman 1.2, and this morning I branched develop to
1.2-stable. Rejoice!

We're still open for bug fixes though, so please begin testing and
filing bugs. If you think they should and can be fixed for 1.2, please
set the "Target Version" field in redmine to 1.2.

There are a number of open bugs already targeted at 1.2, so patches are
welcomed for any of these:

http://projects.theforeman.org/projects/foreman/issues?fixed_version_id=24&set_filter=1&status_id=o

Some CR/VM issues could be resolved with new fog and rbovirt releases,
so it would be good if these can be refreshed. Ohad/Amos?

I think we'll be doing the first release candidate ASAP, but need to
figure out the RPMs… for now I haven't tagged it.

··· -- Dominic Cleal Red Hat Engineering

>
> Yesterday we merged in the last batch of features to develop that are
> intended to form Foreman 1.2, and this morning I branched develop to
> 1.2-stable. Rejoice!
>

Yay!

> We're still open for bug fixes though, so please begin testing and
> filing bugs. If you think they should and can be fixed for 1.2, please
> set the "Target Version" field in redmine to 1.2.

May I direct your attention to Bug #2386: No way to set create_lookupvalue and related permissions - Foreman ?

  1. should I – as a non-dev – alter its target version?
  2. what did I do wrong when filing it that it created no reaction?

Regards, David

··· On Friday, May 10, 2013 1:58:31 PM UTC+2, Dominic Cleal wrote:

Updated search link, the query's now saved publicly on the right hand
side of the issues list:

http://projects.theforeman.org/projects/foreman/issues?query_id=23

··· On 10/05/13 12:58, Dominic Cleal wrote: > Yesterday we merged in the last batch of features to develop that are > intended to form Foreman 1.2, and this morning I branched develop to > 1.2-stable. Rejoice! > > We're still open for bug fixes though, so please begin testing and > filing bugs. If you think they should and can be fixed for 1.2, please > set the "Target Version" field in redmine to 1.2. > > There are a number of open bugs already targeted at 1.2, so patches are > welcomed for any of these: > > http://projects.theforeman.org/projects/foreman/issues?fixed_version_id=24&set_filter=1&status_id=o


Dominic Cleal
Red Hat Engineering

  1. You can if you like, but we reserve the right to change it back :wink:
  2. You did nothing wrong, it just slipped through the triage net - these
    things happen. Do feel free to bump on issues you feel have been forgotten.
    This one looks fairly serious, so I think I'll try and fix it sometime soon
    :slight_smile:

Greg

··· On 15 May 2013 12:09, David Schmitt wrote:

We’re still open for bug fixes though, so please begin testing and

filing bugs. If you think they should and can be fixed for 1.2, please
set the “Target Version” field in redmine to 1.2.

May I direct your attention to Bug #2386: No way to set create_lookupvalue and related permissions - Foreman
?

  1. should I – as a non-dev – alter its target version?
  2. what did I do wrong when filing it that it created no reaction?

>
>
>> We're still open for bug fixes though, so please begin testing and
>>
>>> filing bugs. If you think they should and can be fixed for 1.2, please
>>> set the "Target Version" field in redmine to 1.2.
>>
>>
>> May I direct your attention to Bug #2386: No way to set create_lookupvalue and related permissions - Foreman
>> ?
>>
>> 1) should I – as a non-dev – alter its target version?
>> 2) what did I do wrong when filing it that it created no reaction?
>>
>
> 1) You can if you like,
>

Done.

> but we reserve the right to change it back :wink:
>

Of course :slight_smile:

> 2) You did nothing wrong, it just slipped through the triage net - these
> things happen.
>

Ok, I know who to bother :slight_smile:

> Do feel free to bump on issues you feel have been forgotten.
>

Uhm, I did. And it worked. Obviously :wink:

> This one looks fairly serious, so I think I'll try and fix it sometime
> soon :slight_smile:
>

That would be really great. From my cursory glance at the source I guess it
requires only exposing the appropriate symbols and stuff. But security is
one of those areas where guessing just doesn't cut it.

Regards, David

··· On Wednesday, 15 May 2013 13:44:50 UTC+2, Greg Sutcliffe wrote: > On 15 May 2013 12:09, David Schmitt <da...@dasz.at > wrote:

Yep, just confirming that you were totally in the right :slight_smile: Also useful info
for anyone who's not so forthright :slight_smile:

Greg

··· On 17 May 2013 13:42, David Schmitt wrote:

Do feel free to bump on issues you feel have been forgotten.

Uhm, I did. And it worked. Obviously :wink: