Introduce the tmt+ansible subpackage

[bajertom]

Pull Request Checklist

Fixes #3425

• implement the feature
• include a release note

[happz]

Hmm, I'm not sure this is the correct combination. In the original scenario, after installing both plugins: if ansible is available, both would pull in just the ansible package; if ansible is not available, they would pull in the alternatives, ansible-core and ansible-collection-container-podman. With tmt+ansible, we get either ansible + ansible-collection-containers-podman, or ansible-core + ansible-collection-containers-podman. Which doesn't match the original situation.

Plus, installing tmt+ansible just to make --how local work, as requested in the issue, would pull in ansible-collection-container-podman` which is required for containers, and I did not plan to ever use containers :)

Maybe we should use tmt+ansible to pull in the generic parts - ansible or ansible-core, and leave ansible-collection-container-podman required just by tmt+-provision-container?

[psss]

I believe the ansible or ansible-core hack was only needed for a specific situation around fedora-36 where the package renaming happened. Now the ansible package always depends on ansible-core. So... I guess we can only require ansible-core now?

[psss]

Maybe we should use tmt+ansible to pull in the generic parts - ansible or ansible-core, and leave ansible-collection-container-podman required just by tmt+-provision-container?

That collection is really a small package, so not much extra content. But... at the second look... @happz is right, this is really closely related to the provision-container subpackage.

[happz]

What is the situation with ansible-collection-container-podman? Is ansible or ansible-collection-container-podman still needed?

[psss]

For executing in a container I believe it is. Here's the change which was adding it: da225ee

[happz]

There is no such package on my Fedora 41 laptop. tmt+provision-container pulls in ansible which provides podman-related plugins. ansible-core is indeed unusable for containers, therefore depending on tmt+ansible which depends on ansible-core will not be enough. It seems to me tmt+provision-container should keep its ansible or ansible-collection-container-podman requirement, and gain new tmt+ansible just to pull in whatever "Ansible" means beyond podman integration.

[psss]

Summary from the review session:

tmt+ansible
Require: ansible-core

tmt+provision-virtual
Require: tmt+ansible

tmt+provision-container
Require: tmt+ansible
Require: ansible-collection-containers-podman or ansible

[psss]

Suggested change

	Requires: tmt-ansible == %{version}-%{release}
	Requires: tmt+ansible == %{version}-%{release}

The plus sign should be used in the Requires sections as well, right?

[lukaszachy]

All (?) feature are implemented as ansible playbooks ,
so do I understand correctly that will not work with tmt minimal install? Could it be also documented then?
Or should we have a better name for this package?

[happz]

All (?) feature are implemented as ansible playbooks , so do I understand correctly that will not work with tmt minimal install? Could it be also documented then? Or should we have a better name for this package?

prepare/feature will work under the same conditions as prepare/ansible, so documenting the dependency on Ansible or tmt+ansible for prepare/ansible should also speak about prepare/feature. Whether both should work with the minimal installation, that I cannot answer, knowing very little about the expectations for the minimal installation.

[bajertom]

@lukaszachy As far as I understand it, it will not work with tmt minimal install. I will document this, for the prepare/feature too.

[lukaszachy]

@psss Is the 'prepare feature' a "core feature"? We say "Minimal tmt installation with core features only" as use case for minimal install - https://tmt.readthedocs.io/en/stable/stories/install.html#minimal

Do we even say which are those?