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

fix in logical_volume provider, function "exists": false matches. #277

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

FrankVanDamme
Copy link

eg. check for lv_mysql would return true is lv_mysqllog exists.
This can be fixed by improving the regex searching for the name of the LV.
jira reference: https://tickets.puppetlabs.com/browse/CPR-863

eg. check for lv_mysql would return true is lv_mysqllog exists.
@FrankVanDamme FrankVanDamme requested review from a team and bastelfreak as code owners October 25, 2022 13:25
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.


Frank Van Damme seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@bastelfreak
Copy link
Collaborator

@FrankVanDamme thanks for the PR. Can you take a look at the merge conflict and resolve it?

@jordanbreen28
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @FrankVanDamme can you look to resolve the merge conflict so we can move this along?
Thanks

@jordanbreen28
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @FrankVanDamme - did you get the chance to review the conflicts?

@Q-Storm
Copy link

Q-Storm commented Aug 18, 2023

This was Fixed with the implementation of #244
I this this can be closed

@FrankVanDamme
Copy link
Author

This was Fixed with the implementation of #244 I this this can be closed

It does.
Apologies for not getting around to merging this in > 1.3.0, but the change was utterly incompatible with later revisions anyway.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants