new items in the usage report

[pondrejk]

Problem Statement

Adding items from SAT-30441 and from
theforeman/foreman_maintain#986 that went trough without jira but passed revies

Solution

Related Issues

[pondrejk]

trigger: test-robottelo
pytest: tests/foreman/cli/test_usage_report.py

[Satellite-QE]

PRT Result

Build Number: 11988
Build Status: UNSTABLE
PRT Comment: pytest tests/foreman/cli/test_usage_report.py --external-logging
Test Result : ================== 1 failed, 7 warnings in 1117.61s (0:18:37) ==================

[pondrejk]

trigger: test-robottelo
pytest: tests/foreman/cli/test_usage_report.py

[Satellite-QE]

PRT Result

Build Number: 11990
Build Status: SUCCESS
PRT Comment: pytest tests/foreman/cli/test_usage_report.py --external-logging
Test Result : ================== 1 passed, 7 warnings in 1150.84s (0:19:10) ==================

[Gauravtalreja1]

As this file is used for usage report tests which is maintained by team-endeavour, how about we add this to CODEOWNERS to request review from team-endeavour ?

[pondrejk]

I can do it, though I'm not sure these files are meant to be reviewed, I don't see any other item from the data folder in CODEOWNERS. This file is just a dump from a fresh satellite for the test to compare against, and I suppose any further changes in this file will just be replacing it with a different dump

[Gauravtalreja1]

Personally, I’m not sure what I should be reviewing here 🙂. If this PR doesn’t require a review from any of the reviewers, then who would be the right person or team to review and merge it?

However, I still believe it’s better to have the relevant owners assigned to the file so that any future changes trigger notifications to the respective team. We should ideally proceed with the merge only after the concerned team has ACK'd the changes.

[pondrejk]

@Gauravtalreja1 fair point, there's no harm in doing that, I added the codeowners entry