-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.8k
Gather ansible_os_family in reset #12686
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bbaassssiiee The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Hi @bbaassssiiee. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a github.com member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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-sigs/prow repository. |
|
/ok-to-test |
88cf08f to
2120853
Compare
2120853 to
35dd29a
Compare
|
From what I can tell the reset playbook import internal_facts, which already gather some facts. Would'nt it make more sense to gather it here ? 🤔 |
|
It is rathered in |
|
Hum the linked issue appear to invoke the role from remove-node.yml which also include internal facts, it seems. |
|
(and we should probably add a reset node test to one of the rhel9-like CI job to ensure this does not regress) |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR gathers just the
ansible_os_familythat is required by the next task. This allows running the playbook withoutgather_facts: true, which increases the speed of exection.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #12593
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: