Skip to content

doc: Pin MicroCeph squid (v2-edge)#1344

Draft
roosterfish wants to merge 2 commits intocanonical:v2-edgefrom
roosterfish:pin_ceph_squid
Draft

doc: Pin MicroCeph squid (v2-edge)#1344
roosterfish wants to merge 2 commits intocanonical:v2-edgefrom
roosterfish:pin_ceph_squid

Conversation

@roosterfish
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I just saw the branch is available so we should start pinning it to not slide any tentacle docs into 2 LTS.

The Ceph team cut the squid branch now as they started to work on the tentacle release in the main branch.

Signed-off-by: Julian Pelizäus <julian.pelizaeus@canonical.com>
@roosterfish roosterfish changed the title doc: Pin MicroCeph squid doc: Pin MicroCeph squid (v2-edge) Apr 20, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the Documentation Documentation needs updating label Apr 20, 2026
@roosterfish roosterfish reopened this Apr 20, 2026
Signed-off-by: Minae Lee <minae.lee@canonical.com>
(cherry picked from commit 950ae87)
@roosterfish
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@minaelee we can now pin MicroCeph.

As part of this I am including a commit which I have skipped previously as it failed the link check.
Is the failure we can see in the spell check job related to the loaded objects.inv file?

@roosterfish
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

If we are not including this commit, the RTD job fails with:

/home/docs/checkouts/readthedocs.org/user_builds/canonical-microcloud/checkouts/1344/doc/how-to/initialize.md:16: WARNING: unknown document: 'microceph:explanation/security/full-disk-encryption' [ref.doc]
/home/docs/checkouts/readthedocs.org/user_builds/canonical-microcloud/checkouts/1344/doc/how-to/initialize.md:100: WARNING: unknown document: 'microceph:explanation/security/full-disk-encryption' [ref.doc]
/home/docs/checkouts/readthedocs.org/user_builds/canonical-microcloud/checkouts/1344/doc/reference/requirements.md:72: WARNING: unknown document: 'microceph:explanation/security/full-disk-encryption' [ref.doc]

@minaelee
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

minaelee commented Apr 20, 2026

@minaelee we can now pin MicroCeph.

As part of this I am including a commit which I have skipped previously as it failed the link check. Is the failure we can see in the spell check job related to the loaded objects.inv file?

We discussed this f2f but noting here for posterity that this failure is due to the fact that for the GH CI check, to avoid having to clone and build all integrated docs for every PR, we use the MicroCeph objects.inv file from their https://canonical-microceph.readthedocs-hosted.com/en/v19.2.0-squid/ version. This file currently differs from the objects.inv created by cloning and building MicroCeph from its new squid branch (done by our RTD build), because MicroCeph has not yet updated its v19.2.0-squid docs version to use the squid branch; it still builds from a tag created 8 months ago.

This means that since the RTD build uses the squid branch (which has the updated URL for the about-fde page), we can ignore the GH CI failure here for now, as the actual docs on RTD will build correctly. Ideally, the v19.2.0-squid version on MicroCeph would point to the squid branch.

@roosterfish roosterfish mentioned this pull request Apr 22, 2026
roosterfish added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2026
Backports until
bca83e7.

Missing only #1343 and the
[long running one](#1344)
blocked by MicroCeph docs update.
@roosterfish roosterfish mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2026
roosterfish added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2026
Backports until
149de68.

Missing only #1344
(depending on MicroCeph doc updates, non blocking, just a reference for
the next backports).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Documentation Documentation needs updating

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants