[Maas-devel] Releasing broken nodes
Julian Edwards
julian.edwards at canonical.com
Thu Aug 7 00:04:12 UTC 2014
On Wednesday 06 Aug 2014 09:19:47 Gavin Panella wrote:
> On 5 August 2014 11:20, Graham Binns <graham.binns at canonical.com> wrote:
> > I've just landed a fix for bug 1351451 (Impossible to release a BROKEN
> > node via the API). This is a problem that we (Raphers and I) saw on the
> > Orange Boxes (probably as a result of Raphinator and Gavinator-induced
> > hackery, but still).
> >
> > A question arose in Jools's review:
> >> We probably need to talk about this with rvb. I was under the
> >> impression that marking in-use nodes as broken should keep their owner
> >> as this is a way to know that it was being used and marked broken by a
> >> user, not an admin. Do we need to keep that distinction?
> >
> > Since mark_broken() already releases the node, ISTM that there's been a
> > misunderstanding somewhere. Of course, the node activity log could have
> > "Marked broken by Foo" in it to guide admins…
> >
> > Anyway, I've landed the branch as-is, but it'd be good for us to all get
> > on the same page re: behaviour when marking broken.
>
> There are different classes of "broken" as we modelled in the node
> lifecycle last week. One of them is the Needs Attention "state", which
> is less a status and more a flag, because the node can continue
> operations. The others were proper states, iirc. We probably want to
> change the mark_broken() and mark_fixed() calls to transition a node
> into origin-state-specific broken states, if that makes sense. Or we
> could model it all with flags. I don't know, but it's clear that
> mark_broken() and mark_fixed() were forged in a simpler age.
Right, so presumably the Needs Attention state will retain the owner details.
This is important as the admin may wish to contact the user for further
information.
More information about the Maas-devel
mailing list