Skip to content
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

Rewrite of snip_managing-packages-api.adoc #3444

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rh-max
Copy link
Contributor

@rh-max rh-max commented Nov 11, 2024

What changes are you introducing?

Rewrite of the snip_managing-packages-api.adoc snippet.

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

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-28719

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

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 3.13/Katello 4.15 (Satellite 6.17)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • Foreman 3.8/Katello 4.10
  • Foreman 3.7/Katello 4.9 (Satellite 6.14)
  • Foreman 3.6/Katello 4.8
  • Foreman 3.5/Katello 4.7 (Satellite 6.13; orcharhino 6.6/6.7)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.5.

@rh-max rh-max added the Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective label Nov 11, 2024
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.

Converting the steps to a description of the request data is nice!

I suggest to have something as follows:

.API procedure
. Create your API request body:
+
...
...
. Send your API request to {Project}:
+
...
...

Having a sentence about the API above the "API procedure" title looks off to me.


.Verification
* In the {ProjectWebUI}, navigate to *Monitor* > *Jobs* and see the report of the scheduled or completed remote execution job to {PackageAction} the packages on the selected hosts.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change

Copy link
Contributor

@Lennonka Lennonka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A couple of nitpicks, otherwise looking good

@@ -1,67 +1,69 @@
Create a body of the API request in the JSON format by following the instructions below.
Supply your API request in the JSON format.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
Supply your API request in the JSON format.


* Specify your API request:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
* Specify your API request:
. Supply the API request body in the JSON format:

The API procedure contains two steps. Therefore, numbered list should be used. Also, this step defines the body. The actual API request is in the second step.

* If you omit this field, it defaults to `"static_query"`.
--

* Send a `POST` request with the created body to the `/api/job_invocations` endpoint of your {ProjectServer} and see a formatted response:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
* Send a `POST` request with the created body to the `/api/job_invocations` endpoint of your {ProjectServer} and see a formatted response:
. Send a `POST` request with the created body to the `/api/job_invocations` endpoint of your {ProjectServer} and see a formatted response:

@pr-processor pr-processor bot added the Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author label Nov 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Waiting on contributor Requires an action from the author
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants