modules: Replace some 4.6 references with {product-version} #35601
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
size/S
|
✔️ Deploy Preview for osdocs ready! 🔨 Explore the source changes: 5d62b68 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/osdocs/deploys/619593418985d80009ec76ae 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-35601--osdocs.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/installing/validating-an-installation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like this will have to be bumped by hand:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you use [source,terminal,subs="attributes+"], it'll render.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rebased on main and added subs="attributes+" with db1330b6c -> 0b101ec52.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Uhh, I have no idea why the preview renders this as 4.5.4:
|
Similar referenced version issue in modules/update-upgrading-cli.adoc, please get the details from [1] |
|
Similar version issue in "Querying the status of the cluster nodes by using the CLI", in 4.7[1], 4.8[2] doc, the kube version is always v1.19.0+9f84db3. It would be better to get it updated based on the product version. [1] https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.7/installing/validating-an-installation.html#querying-the-status-of-cluster-nodes-using-the-cli_validating-an-installation |
wking
force-pushed
the
make-some-4.6-references-dynamic
branch
from
db1330b to
0b101ec
Compare
Part of that has a 4.8.13 -> 4.9.0 history, and I haven't read carefully enough to know if it's important for that to continue to be a minor bump or not. Can we punt those refs to follow-up work? |
To help folks running on more recent releases feel more comfortable that these docs apply to them (they do) without needing to worry that important parts are stale.
wking
force-pushed
the
make-some-4.6-references-dynamic
branch
from
0b101ec to
5d62b68
Compare
|
Given what I know about the preview build, this looks right. @shellyyang1989, is this good to merge? |
Sure. Thanks. |
|
It looks good except the result of |
Do we have a variable I can use to make that dynamic? Or is it one more thing I can punt out to future work? |
@kalexand-rh could you help confirm if we have the variable? If that's false, I'm fine to punt out to future work. |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
|
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
openshift-ci
bot
added
lifecycle/rotten
|
Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Reopen the issue by commenting /close |
|
@openshift-bot: Closed this PR. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
4 participants
To help folks running on more recent releases feel more comfortable that these docs apply to them (they do) without needing to worry that important parts are stale.