Skip to content

Conversation

@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member

What changes are you introducing?

  • Edits to the supported OS section
  • Moving the supported OS section to the beginning of the installation prereqs

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

Some of this was suggested in #4070 (review), the rest is just to give users a bit smoother experience.

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

N/A

Contributor checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 3.16/Katello 4.18 (Satellite 6.18)
  • Foreman 3.15/Katello 4.17
  • Foreman 3.14/Katello 4.16 (Satellite 6.17; orcharhino 7.4)
  • Foreman 3.13/Katello 4.15 (EL9 only)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16; orcharhino 7.2 on EL9 only; orcharhino 7.3)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only; orcharhino 7.0 on EL8+EL9; orcharhino 7.1 with Leapp)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.9.

Review checklists

Tech review (performed by an Engineer who did not author the PR; can be skipped if tech review is unnecessary):

  • The PR documents a recommended, user-friendly path.
  • The PR removes steps that have been made unnecessary or obsolete.
  • Any steps introduced or updated in the PR have been tested to confirm that they lead to the documented end result.

Style review (by a Technical Writer who did not author the PR):

  • The PR conforms with the team's style guidelines.
  • The PR introduces documentation that describes a user story rather than a product feature.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Aug 28, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova removed the Needs testing Requires functional testing label Aug 28, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova marked this pull request as ready for review August 28, 2025 15:39
Copy link
Member

@ekohl ekohl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is mostly an improvement. I don't like that quick start becomes longer because of an additional header. It was already too long.

My ideal for quick start is that it fits on a single screen, without scrolling. Perhaps you the quick start guide can simply point to the regular installation guide for the requirements and drop both the OS and system requirements altogether?

@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

aneta-petrova commented Aug 28, 2025

My ideal for quick start is that it fits on a single screen, without scrolling. Perhaps you the quick start guide can simply point to the regular installation guide for the requirements and drop both the OS and system requirements altogether?

Is it still really a quickstart, though, if you ask people to read the full book elsewhere? I'll admit I still struggle with the idea of a quickstart guide. Is it something that's intended for testing and then users are expected to throw the result away and install again, this time properly? If so, then let's include the necessary minimum requirements for a very basic scenario without, let's say, any capsules or hosts (so just OS, memory, fresh system). In any case, that's what I'm trying now -- with a separate requirements module, just for quickstart.

Is this what you had in mind @ekohl? Although the changes to the quickstart in this PR were mostly accidental, I'm happy to try and improve that guide as well.

@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Aug 28, 2025
@ekohl
Copy link
Member

ekohl commented Aug 29, 2025

Is this what you had in mind @ekohl? Although the changes to the quickstart in this PR were mostly accidental, I'm happy to try and improve that guide as well.

Looking at https://theforeman-foreman-documentation-preview-pr-4203.surge.sh/nightly/Quickstart/index-foreman-deb.html I'd drop the Operating system requirements and System requirements chapters altogether and simply link in the intro text to the real installation guide.

For Debian they don't add anything because Configuring repositories already has instructions for specific OS versions so IMHO that's already covered. On EL there is no such header so perhaps that's something to consider, but the URLs already say el9 so IMHO it's not a big deal.

@ekohl
Copy link
Member

ekohl commented Aug 29, 2025

Is it still really a quickstart, though, if you ask people to read the full book elsewhere? I'll admit I still struggle with the idea of a quickstart guide. Is it something that's intended for testing and then users are expected to throw the result away and install again, this time properly? If so, then let's include the necessary minimum requirements for a very basic scenario without, let's say, any capsules or hosts (so just OS, memory, fresh system). In any case, that's what I'm trying now -- with a separate requirements module, just for quickstart.

It should be the quickest way to get a system up and running, without too many details. I think https://theforeman.org/manuals/3.15/quickstart_guide.html is still a decent example: on my screen I can see all instructions without scrolling. That last part is IMHO really important and something that the current guide fails. Mostly because the headers in this guide are very big and take up a lot of space. So do the tables.

Rename OS prereq section

Move OS requirements before system reqs

Move OS table to the beginning

Drop OS requirements

They are already in system requirements

Simplify wording

Use more specific wording

Fix capitalization

Simplify OS table

Simplify satellite conditionals

Merge quickstart system reqs with regular system reqs

This is necessary because the OS reqs that precede the system reqs
in the quickstart guide now include `.Additional resources` so the
Quickstart's system reqs need a heading.

Split system requirements for quickstart

Spell out EL when defining EPEL

Drop implementation details from quickstart prereqs

Apply suggestions from style review

Co-authored-by: Brian Angelica <[email protected]>
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Great, thanks for the information! My takeaway from the conversation so far is that for the installation guides, there are no significant objections to the changes introduced in this PR. It's the quickstart guide that needs a bit more work so I'll focus on that.

The goal is to keep the instructions for quickstart short. The goal is not to set up a testing environment that is expected to be discarded. In that case, I'm still concerned about skipping the prerequisites but perhaps that could be solved by transparently explaining the intention for the quickstart guide and by linking to the full installation guide. I'll work on a draft.

Co-authored-by: Maximilian Kolb <[email protected]>
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova mentioned this pull request Aug 29, 2025
15 tasks
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

To summarize the latest state of proposed changes for the Quickstart's system requirements:

  • They have their own file, separate from the main installation guide's requirements
  • They list only the most critical items, linking to the full installation guide for everything else (such as less common scenarios)
  • They are limited only to actual system requirements (this involved dropping a sentence or two about the installer itself)

All this is intended to keep the Quickstart guide as short as possible, and I also raised #4205 to make sure the guide's abstract explains the scope as well.

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova requested a review from ekohl August 29, 2025 14:07
Copy link
Member

@ekohl ekohl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! Now it's way shorter and I really like that.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added tech review done No issues from the technical perspective and removed Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective labels Sep 1, 2025
@Lennonka Lennonka added the Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author label Sep 1, 2025
@pr-processor pr-processor bot added Needs re-review and removed Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author labels Sep 3, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

style-wise LGTM

@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova added style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Sep 3, 2025
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova merged commit d9b6c9c into theforeman:master Sep 3, 2025
10 checks passed
@aneta-petrova aneta-petrova deleted the review-os-prereq branch September 3, 2025 13:18
aneta-petrova added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2025
* Review OS prerequisites and move them
* Review quickstart system prerequisites

---------

Co-authored-by: Brian Angelica <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Maximilian Kolb <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit d9b6c9c)
@aneta-petrova
Copy link
Member Author

Merged to "master" and cherry-picked:

17fbcad..df3ba87 3.16 -> 3.16

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

Labels

style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective tech review done No issues from the technical perspective

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants