CNV-3924 Feature Support Storage Matrix

[bgaydosrh]

This PR replaces #22638

Label enterprise-4.5 enterprise-4.6

Tagging @adellape for peer review.

All comments in previous PR have been acted upon and content is ready for final review.

See http://file.bos.redhat.com/bgaydos/072020/virt/virtual_machines/virtual_disks/virt-features-for-storage.html for test build.

Thanks,
Bob

[openshift-docs-preview-bot]

The preview will be available shortly at:

• https://CNV-3924_2--ocpdocs.netlify.com/

[apinnick]

@nellyc Please review the "VM import" column.

Update: Nelly has approved the VM import column.

[nellyc]

I am wondering if 'supported' is a good word to use in the table,
as QE are not covering all storage types.
@dankenigsberg WDYT?

[dankenigsberg]

@nellyc I share your sentiment. "Supported" may misleading the reader to understand that Red Hat would support any CSI driver, while it is the CSI vendor that should do it.

I think that "acceptable" or simply the tick mark would be better.

[bgaydosrh]

@nellyc I share your sentiment. "Supported" may misleading the reader to understand that Red Hat would support any CSI driver, while it is the CSI vendor that should do it.

I think that "acceptable" or simply the tick mark would be better.

@dankenigsberg and @nellyc would you be fine with either YES for Supported and NO for Not Supported? We try to stay away from graphics in tables. The other alternative I can think of is using "X" and "O" and then defining that in the table key.

I pinged @aglitke and he is fine with YES and NO, he likes it.

[nellyc]

Im fine with Yes/No

[fabiand]

Some things still need calrification

[bgaydosrh]

Some things still need calrification

@fabiand Please review the latest comments and suggest clarifications if still needed. I am hoping to get this into peer review as soon as possible since this is our last week before release. Thanks, Bob

[bgaydosrh]

Im fine with Yes/No

Changed "Supported" to "Yes" and "Not Supported" to "No".

[aglitke]

lgtm

[nellyc]

I think my only problem is with the vm import now
there is a difference between vmware & rhv imports
vmware import works with rwx, but rhv import doesn't
not sure how we should display it

[bgaydosrh]

I think my only problem is with the vm import now
there is a difference between vmware & rhv imports
vmware import works with rwx, but rhv import doesn't
not sure how we should display it

@nellyc We might be able to fix this with a footnote to that effect. @alitke what do you think?

[adellape]

Requesting footnote style changes in the table, but otherwise LGTM.

[adellape]

Per discussion, let's update the table footnotes per https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/blob/master/contributing_to_docs/doc_guidelines.adoc#alternative-footnote-styling-in-tables.

[adellape]

👍

[adellape]

/cherrypick enterprise-4.5

[adellape]

/cherrypick enterprise-4.6

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@adellape: new pull request created: #24174

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-4.5

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@adellape: new pull request created: #24175

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-4.6

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.