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.

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

Add Amazon object storage automation model #13532

Conversation

aiperon
Copy link
Contributor

@aiperon aiperon commented Jan 17, 2017

Similar changes to #13458.
Automation service model required for Amazon object storage manager.

Depends on ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-amazon#106.

@miq-bot add_label providers/amazon, automate/model

@gberginc
Copy link
Contributor

@miq-bot add_label providers/storage

Automation service model required for Amazon object storage manager.
@aiperon aiperon force-pushed the add_amazon_object_storage_automation_model branch from 70c1439 to 3439900 Compare January 18, 2017 09:51
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jan 18, 2017

Checked commit xlab-si@3439900 with ruby 2.2.6, rubocop 0.46.0, and haml-lint 0.19.0
1 file checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks good. 🍪

@aiperon
Copy link
Contributor Author

aiperon commented Jan 18, 2017

@miq-bot add_label wip

@miq-bot miq-bot added the wip label Jan 18, 2017
@chessbyte chessbyte changed the title Add Amazon object storage automation model [WIP] Add Amazon object storage automation model Jan 18, 2017
@gberginc gberginc mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2017
@gberginc
Copy link
Contributor

@aiperon should be closed due to the combined PR related to the S3 changes #13580

@aiperon aiperon closed this Jan 19, 2017
@aiperon aiperon changed the title [WIP] Add Amazon object storage automation model Add Amazon object storage automation model Jan 19, 2017
@tadeboro tadeboro deleted the add_amazon_object_storage_automation_model branch March 30, 2018 07:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants