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

MTV-1884: Software Compatibility Guideline Inconsistency #616

Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions documentation/modules/common-attributes.adoc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@
:ocp: Red Hat OpenShift
:ocp-name: OpenShift
:ocp-short: OpenShift
// when udating the ocp-version, update the ocp-y-version
:ocp-version: 4.17
:ocp-y-version: 4.17, 4.16, 4.15
:operator: mtv-operator
:operator-name-ui: Migration Toolkit for Virtualization Operator
:operator-name: MTV Operator
Expand Down
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion documentation/modules/compatibility-guidelines.adoc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,11 +8,13 @@

You must install compatible software versions.


// check OCP version
[cols="1,1,1,1,1,1", options="header"]
.Compatible software versions
|===
|{project-full} |{ocp} |{virt} |VMware vSphere |{rhv-full}|OpenStack
|{project-z-version} |{ocp-version} or later |{ocp-version} or later |6.5 or later |4.4 SP1 or later|16.1 or later
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure if we should have this in docs as we will need to maintain it for longer time/additional versions.
If we go with this, we should use the Y stream version instead as the whole Y determines the OCP support? or is this whole page Z stream based?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@anarnold97 anarnold97 Jan 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mnecas - good point. but I could create an attribute, and then it is updated on Y streams when we update the attributes:

// when udating the ocp-version, update the ocp-y-version
:ocp-version: 4.17
:ocp-y-version: 4.17, 4.16, 4.15

image

WDYT

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@RichardHoch - WDYT. This is pretty maintainable, right?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@anarnold97 Definitely maintainable.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I ment to replace the project-z-version with something like project-y-version as the ocp versions apply for all Z versions

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh that is even easier. Swap to this attribute:

:project-version: 2.7

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

image

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, this looks good to me

|{project-version} |{ocp-y-version} |{ocp-y-version} |6.5 or later |4.4 SP1 or later|16.1 or later
|===

[NOTE]
Expand Down