Skip to content

Move target_oval_version to product_properties#13966

Merged
vojtapolasek merged 1 commit into
ComplianceAsCode:masterfrom
Mab879:product_based_oval_version
Oct 2, 2025
Merged

Move target_oval_version to product_properties#13966
vojtapolasek merged 1 commit into
ComplianceAsCode:masterfrom
Mab879:product_based_oval_version

Conversation

@Mab879
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Mab879 Mab879 commented Oct 1, 2025

Description:

Move target_oval_version to product_properties

Rationale:

After reviewing #13918 I thought it might useful to config the OVAL version per product than global.

Review Hints:

  1. Build your product(s) of choice
  2. Check the oval version with rg "oval:schema_version" build/ssg-*ds.xml

@Mab879 Mab879 added this to the 0.1.79 milestone Oct 1, 2025
@Mab879 Mab879 added the Infrastructure Our content build system label Oct 1, 2025
@Mab879 Mab879 changed the title Move target_oval_version to product_propertites Move target_oval_version to product_properties Oct 1, 2025
@Mab879 Mab879 force-pushed the product_based_oval_version branch from 91672ca to 23a655d Compare October 1, 2025 15:49
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dodys dodys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just a few fixes needed

Comment thread product_properties/10-oval.yml Outdated
Comment thread tests/data/product_stability/debian11.yml Outdated
Comment thread tests/data/product_stability/debian12.yml Outdated
Comment thread tests/data/product_stability/debian13.yml Outdated
@Mab879 Mab879 force-pushed the product_based_oval_version branch from 23a655d to 290e0a4 Compare October 1, 2025 16:02
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@evgenyz evgenyz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't like having both target_oval_version and target_oval_version_str, but that's a story for another day.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Xeicker Xeicker 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
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dodys dodys left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, thanks!

@vojtapolasek vojtapolasek self-assigned this Oct 2, 2025
@vojtapolasek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

/retest

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@vojtapolasek vojtapolasek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, thank you.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openshift-ci Bot commented Oct 2, 2025

@Mab879: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-aws-openshift-node-compliance 290e0a4 link true /test e2e-aws-openshift-node-compliance

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@vojtapolasek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I am merging because this change affects Ubuntu only and Ubuntu group approved.

@vojtapolasek vojtapolasek merged commit 1bd7235 into ComplianceAsCode:master Oct 2, 2025
136 of 138 checks passed
@Mab879 Mab879 deleted the product_based_oval_version branch October 2, 2025 16:52
Comment thread CMakeLists.txt
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That is something i missed, no longer valid. The only limit on support now is the scanner used. I will get PR up shortly.

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

Labels

Infrastructure Our content build system

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants