Skip to content

Conversation

@archanaserver
Copy link
Contributor

based on #288

Copy link
Member

@ekohl ekohl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there an issue somewhere to rewrite it into Foreman's own recurring logic? Katello already depends on it so I'd think it could be done.

This is an architectural choice that I think we can drive. The foreman-tasks cleanup may be an exception because there is a bigger risk (cleaning up a task from a task can break if you aren't careful) but Katello can rely on it.

If that isn't too hard for the Katello devs to do then we'll have a better and more scalable design.

@ehelms
Copy link
Member

ehelms commented Nov 13, 2025

Let's ask @ianballou

@ianballou
Copy link

Here is the issue: https://projects.theforeman.org/issues/35237

@evgeni
Copy link
Member

evgeni commented Dec 12, 2025

needs a rebase

@archanaserver archanaserver force-pushed the recurring-katello-tasks branch from 459c2d0 to e1b9f1f Compare December 17, 2025 10:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants