Skip to content

Conversation

@rob0d
Copy link
Contributor

@rob0d rob0d commented Jan 9, 2026

Updated task names to make it clearer that it will look for SPAU or EXIT step.
Changed the time we are waiting for SPAU or EXIT phases to happen to 240*5 minutes = 20 hours

Improve SUM task names for better readability as discussed in #1139

@rob0d rob0d changed the title sap_swpm: sap_swpm: Improve SUM processing behaviour for slower systems Jan 9, 2026
@rob0d rob0d changed the title sap_swpm: Improve SUM processing behaviour for slower systems sap_swpm: Improve SUM handling behaviour for slower systems Jan 9, 2026
Copy link
Member

@berndfinger berndfinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@marcelmamula marcelmamula left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rob0d Where does this PR fix issue 1139?

This PR only updates task names and hardcodes longer timeout. It does not change any logic for SPAU steps.

@rob0d
Copy link
Contributor Author

rob0d commented Jan 13, 2026

@rob0d Where does this PR fix issue 1139?

This PR only updates task names and hardcodes longer timeout. It does not change any logic for SPAU steps.

There is no issue with any logic for SPAU or any other steps.

@marcelmamula
Copy link
Contributor

@rob0d Then it would mean "Fixes issue #1139" is incorrect, because it did not fix anything.

Correct sentence should be: "Improve SUM task names for better readability as discussed in #1139".

This is not meant to be pedantic remark, but instead attempt to ensure that other issue is not closed because this PR seemingly fixed it.

@rob0d rob0d requested a review from marcelmamula January 13, 2026 10:56
Copy link
Contributor

@marcelmamula marcelmamula left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@marcelmamula
Copy link
Contributor

@berndfinger @rob0d I have removed LGTM reviews because there was commit after reviews were done.

Plus this name is not very good sap_swpm_swpm_env_vars.

@rob0d
Copy link
Contributor Author

rob0d commented Jan 14, 2026

@berndfinger @rob0d I have removed LGTM reviews because there was commit after reviews were done.

Plus this name is not very good sap_swpm_swpm_env_vars.

Oops. That was a mistake. It should have gone to a new PR. Fixing it.
What name would you like.

@marcelmamula
Copy link
Contributor

@rob0d Name would be simple sap_swpm_env_var_dict or sap_swpm_env_vars_dict, but in new PR as you said.

@rob0d
Copy link
Contributor Author

rob0d commented Jan 14, 2026

OK. I've now removed the last commit.

Copy link
Contributor

@marcelmamula marcelmamula left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@sean-freeman
Copy link
Member

@rob0d As you say, need an Issue/PR to discuss child Shell Env Var injection use cases and subsequent Ansible code changes 🙂 No worries on the accidental commit, thanks for the quick resolution

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants