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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix: ansible verbosity #2651

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 17, 2020
Merged

fix: ansible verbosity #2651

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 17, 2020

Conversation

camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor

@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 commented Mar 13, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Description of the change:

  • Fix ansible verbosity annotation

Motivation for the change:

Note: If this PR is fixing an issue make sure to add a note saying:
Closes #2627

@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. language/ansible Issue is related to an Ansible operator project labels Mar 13, 2020
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 force-pushed the fix-issue-2627 branch 2 times, most recently from 9402c40 to 6b74b06 Compare March 13, 2020 19:52
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 changed the title fix: ansible verbosity WIP - fix: ansible verbosity Mar 16, 2020
@camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. labels Mar 16, 2020
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 changed the title WIP - fix: ansible verbosity fix: ansible verbosity Mar 16, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 16, 2020
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 16, 2020
fabianvf
fabianvf approved these changes Mar 16, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabianvf fabianvf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Did you manually verify this fixed the issue the user was seeing? If so then all good to go

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 16, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 16, 2020
@camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor Author

HI @fabianvf,

Yes, I checked it manually. I reproduce the issue and check it with the POC to ensure that solved.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 16, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 16, 2020
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 merged commit 6d12e83 into operator-framework:master Mar 17, 2020
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 deleted the fix-issue-2627 branch March 17, 2020 09:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fabianvf fabianvf fabianvf approved these changes

@jmrodri jmrodri Awaiting requested review from jmrodri

@bharathi-tenneti bharathi-tenneti Awaiting requested review from bharathi-tenneti

@hasbro17 hasbro17 Awaiting requested review from hasbro17

@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 Awaiting requested review from varshaprasad96

Assignees

@fabianvf fabianvf

Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. language/ansible Issue is related to an Ansible operator project
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Ansible: verbosity level 0 doesn't seem to work
3 participants
@camilamacedo86 @openshift-ci-robot @fabianvf