Epic Goal

provide better validation errors and here are some examples:

• Customer claiming: , I cannot see the exact discrepancy within the policy (e.g I simply know that the issue lies somewhere in the channel / installPlanApproval / name / source / sourceNameSpace). Is it possible to narrow down the exact "field(s)/value(s)" that are in breach of the policy?

• I cannot see the exact discrepancy within the policy (e.g I simply know that the issue lies somewhere in the channel / installPlanApproval / name / source / sourceNameSpace). Is it possible to narrow down the exact "field(s)/value(s)" that are in breach of the policy?

Why is this important?

• …

Scenarios

1. ...

Acceptance Criteria

• CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
• Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement details and documents.
• ...

Dependencies (internal and external)

1. ...

Previous Work (Optional):

1. …

Open questions::

1. …

Done Checklist

• CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
• Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
• DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
• DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
• QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
• QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
• DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>