[NEEDS SECOND REVIEW] Collection inclusion: include microsoft.iis in the Ansible community package

Project Discussions
1

Discussion: New collection microsoft.iis · ansible-collections/ansible-inclusion · Discussion #78 · GitHub

I’ve conducted a first review, and the collection imo satisfies the requirements and ready for inclusion.

Could anybody from the @SteeringCommittee conduct the second short review as specified in the comment? i.e. to check only the following would be enough (just copy this to a comment in the discussion and go through it):

  • follows the Ansible documentation standards and the style guide
  • follows development conventions; as well as these other requirements:
    • modules satisfy the concept of idempotency
    • modules that only gather information are named <something>_info
    • modules that return ansible_facts are named <something>_facts and do not return non-facts
    • other modules must not allow querying information using specific state option values, or similar mechanisms (like state=get or state=query). These features should be moved to <something>_info or <something>_fact modules.
    • check_mode is supported in all _info and _facts modules

Thanks

2 Likes
2

@SteeringCommittee could anybody please review? Otherwise, we should change the policy to make one review sufficient for inclusion if there are no volunteers within SC for a week or so.
The list of the items to check is very short, shouldn’t take longer than 15 minutes max to check a few modules.

3

It’s kind of hard to review a PowerShell collection if you don’t know PowerShell. I’m not sure how many folks in SC know enough about PowerShell to be able to do a good review for this one, but I guess the number is smaller than the number of all persons in the SC. (Well it definitely is, since I’m at least one such person…)

Anyway, I don’t think reducing requirements is a solution to the review problem.

4

@felixfontein thanks for reviewing the collection!

  1. Jordan fixed the stuff you found, PTAL
  2. Another option could be a rotation of sort. I’m gonna raise a dedicated topic as soon as we solve this and the other request.