From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 651A1D79B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:03:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 48D8D15B71
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:03:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:03:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6308F42BF1
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:03:37 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <10aec6b8-20b7-48d1-a709-1f2d2ef213d9@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:03:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20230509075611.884153-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
 <e172c00d-f7a1-9dd6-57a4-c4569b0f5486@proxmox.com>
From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <e172c00d-f7a1-9dd6-57a4-c4569b0f5486@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.085 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC manager] ui: DirEdit: add hint when to enable
 shared
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 10:03:38 -0000

I'll send a v2 with tooltips and for LVM as well.

On 8/21/23 10:48, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> Am 09.05.23 um 09:56 schrieb Aaron Lauterer:
>> To hopefully reduce confusion what the 'shared' checkbox does.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>
>> I saw it one time too many where users were a bit confused as to what
>> this checkbox is for. Since we have a hard time to find a better label,
>> maybe we want to put a small hint below it?
>>
>> The phrasing can probably be improved upon. But I think having something
>> there that can hopefully explain it enough, transporting that the
>> sharing itself needs to be configured beforehand by the user, would help.
>>
>>   www/manager6/storage/DirEdit.js | 4 ++++
> 
> While directory certainly is the most common one, adding a similar hint
> for LVM might also be worth it.

Good idea!

> 
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/www/manager6/storage/DirEdit.js b/www/manager6/storage/DirEdit.js
>> index 7e9ec44d..8c6f868a 100644
>> --- a/www/manager6/storage/DirEdit.js
>> +++ b/www/manager6/storage/DirEdit.js
>> @@ -31,6 +31,10 @@ Ext.define('PVE.storage.DirInputPanel', {
>>   		uncheckedValue: 0,
>>   		fieldLabel: gettext('Shared'),
>>   	    },
>> +	    {
>> +		xtype: 'displayfield',
> 
> Might be better as a tooltip or do you think that's not prominent enough?

Both work for me. From a UI perspective, the tooltip is surely better. The 
downside is, that users might not notice it.

> 
>> +		value: gettext('Enable if the path is a location that is shared between the nodes in the cluster.'),
> 
> With regards to phrasing: maybe "Enable if the underlying file system is
> already shared between nodes"?
> 
Sounds better than the first iteration.
>> +	    },
>>   	];
>>   
>>   	me.callParent();