Bug #19927
Hammer csv import package rules doesn't handle rules with the same name
Description
Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a content view with a package filter
2. Create two rules on this filter with the same name (e.g. exclude vim version > 3.0 and vim version = 3.0)
3. Export your filters
4. Remove the filters
5. Do an import
Expected results:
Your filter should have two rules (e.g. exclude vim version > 3.0 and vim version = 3.0)
Actual result:
Your filter only has one rule, the second one (e.g. vim version = 3.0).
The problem is that name isn’t unique across filter rules but hammer csv assumes it is:
Related issues
Associated revisions
History
#1
Updated by David Davis about 4 years ago
Updated by - Blocks Bug #19724: Support importing/exporting erratum filters added
#2
Updated by David Davis about 4 years ago
- Subject changed from Hammer package filter rules doesn't handle rules with the same name to Hammer csv import package rules doesn't handle rules with the same name
#3
Updated by David Davis about 4 years ago
- Bugzilla link set to 1458843
#4
Updated by Thomas McKay about 4 years ago
Updated by Just an FYI... Note that many/all of the csv files expect that names are unique and don't use labels typically. Perhaps an additional column should be added for label and then use that first, falling back to name column.
#5
Updated by David Davis about 4 years ago
Your idea is good but not really applicable. Content view rules don't have labels. This makes updating them hard.
#6
Updated by David Davis about 4 years ago
Talking this over with @jsherrill, I think when importing (or updating) existing filters, it might make sense to drop all its rules and then re-add the ones from the csv.
#7
Updated by The Foreman Bot about 4 years ago
Updated by - Pull request https://github.com/Katello/hammer-cli-csv/pull/157 added
#8
Updated by Andrew Kofink about 4 years ago
Updated by - Status changed from New to Closed
Fixes #19927 - Drop and readd rules when importing filters
This is a change to the way we handle filter rules. Basically, there is
no way to ensure uniqueness among filter rules so updating rules isn't
possible. The package filter rule has a unique check but it simply
checks ALL fields to see if the rule exists already. This doesn't really
allow for matching though since any field change would constitute a new
rule. Since we're importing/updating filters and not rules, I think
dropping the rules and recreating them is the best way to handle
updates.