Fixes #36776 - Fixed issue where composite content views promoted to …

[qcjames53]

…lifecycle environments referencing the env name would error on promotion.

Changed env replacement source.

What are the changes introduced in this pull request?

Composite content views containing archived repositories have their environment set to nil. When promoting this CVV to a lifecycle environment with a registry name containing the lifecycle environment's name, this would previously cause the action to error out. After the changes, if the env is unset, Katello will use a different naming schema to name containers. This should only impact archived repositories.

Considerations taken when implementing this change?

I reworked a little logic in app/models/katello/repository.rb. There is a truth table in the comments which shows the decisions taken.

What are the testing steps for this pull request?

1. Create a product:

hammer product create --description "Product Busybox Container" --name Product_Busybox_Container --label "Product_Busybox_Container" --organization myorg

2. Create a repository and sync it:

hammer repository create \
  --content-type "docker" \
  --organization myorg \
  --product "Product_Busybox_Container" \
  --url "https://registry-1.docker.io/" \
  --name "library/busybox" \
  --docker-upstream-name "library/busybox" \
  --label "library_busybox" \
  --include-tags "stable, 1.35.0"
hammer repository synchronize --name "library/busybox" --product "Product_Busybox_Container" --organization myorg

3. Create a content view with this repo and publish it:

hammer content-view create --label ContentView_Busybox --name ContentView_Busybox --organization-label myorg --repository-ids <repo_id>
hammer content-view publish --organization myorg --name ContentView_Busybox

4. Using the UI, go to Content -> Lifecycle -> Content Views. Create a content view of type composite content view. I left auto-publish unchecked.
5. Once created, add the ContentView_Busybox CV to this composite CV.
6. Go to Content -> Lifecycle -> Lifecycle Environments. Create an environment path. Click on the newly-created environment path. On the details tab, modify the registry name pattern to <%= repository.name %>.
7. Create another environment path. Set its registry name pattern to <%= lifecycle_environment.label %>/<%= repository.name %>
8. Go to Content -> Lifecycle -> Content Views. Click on the kebab menu next to your composite content view and select promote. Select the first lifecycle environment and publish. There should be no errors because the environment isn't being referenced.
9. Refresh the page. Click on the kebab menu next to your composite content view and select promote. Select the second lifecycle environment and publish. This PR should not error out either.
10. Using Katello console, you should be able to inspect the names of the promoted containers. They should not follow the environment pattern but should instead follow the default schema.

[theforeman-bot]

Issues: #36776

[ianballou]

After the changes, if the env is unset, Katello will grab a valid environment from the first non-archived repository in the repository's content view.

I haven't fully looked through the code yet, but I don't think the special registry naming scheme should even apply to archived repositories. The archived repositories shouldn't be exposed to users besides for debugging. While I'm guessing this stops the error, the env picked likely doesn't match the repository.

Could we instead stop using the special naming scheme for archived repositories? Perhaps just ignore the registry naming pattern?

[qcjames53]

After the changes, if the env is unset, Katello will grab a valid environment from the first non-archived repository in the repository's content view.

I haven't fully looked through the code yet, but I don't think the special registry naming scheme should even apply to archived repositories. The archived repositories shouldn't be exposed to users besides for debugging. While I'm guessing this stops the error, the env picked likely doesn't match the repository.

Could we instead stop using the special naming scheme for archived repositories? Perhaps just ignore the registry naming pattern?

I implemented the suggestions we talked about in our PM, meaning if the environment does not exist (as in archived repos), render the name as if a pattern is not provided. I reworked the logic a little to make it easier to understand and added a big table in the documentation to explain everything.

[ianballou]

I haven't tested it, but the logic looks solid to me! Thanks for the table.

[ianballou]

Functionality-wise it works like a charm

[ianballou]

Ship it!