[PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Shannon Sterz]

Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
---
 ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
index 3732ffe..0ee5afc 100644
--- a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
+++ b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
@@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ impl LoadableComponent for AuthTokenPanelComponent {
                         All existing ISOs with this token will lose access!"
                     ))
                     .disabled(self.selection.is_empty())
+                    .dangerous(true)
                     .on_activate(link.callback(|_| Message::RegenerateSecret)),
             )
             .with_flex_spacer()
-- 
2.47.3

applied: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Lukas Wagner]

On Thu, 28 May 2026 11:26:18 +0200, Shannon Sterz wrote:
> 


Applied, thanks!

[1/1] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous
      commit: fe21265a0e860314ef63ca116e02ece020f59a67

Best regards,
-- 
Lukas Wagner <l.wagner@proxmox.com>

Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Thomas Lamprecht]

Thx for the patch and the quick apply. FWIW this is missing commit
message body and none added on applying, a short sentence here would
be appreciated.

Am 28.05.26 um 11:25 schrieb Shannon Sterz:
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
> index 3732ffe..0ee5afc 100644
> --- a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
> +++ b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ impl LoadableComponent for AuthTokenPanelComponent {
>                          All existing ISOs with this token will lose access!"
>                      ))
>                      .disabled(self.selection.is_empty())
> +                    .dangerous(true)
>                      .on_activate(link.callback(|_| Message::RegenerateSecret)),
>              )
>              .with_flex_spacer()

IMO a bit borderline, as this is not like a classic API token where this
causes active service disruption.
OTOH. setting that flag hasn't that big of an impact and doesn't really
hurt either, so fine. I'd just avoid using it for everything that can be
framed as destructive, as most things with a confirmation prompts might be,
as then it looses the punch a bit (or could again just be the default).
But when implementing these yesterday I also could not come up with a
definitive rule that always holds, so certainly not a clear cut - just
wanted to avoid that we use this to liberally now - as said, here it was
OK to do (except the short missing rationale).

Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Lukas Wagner]

On Thu May 28, 2026 at 11:54 AM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> IMO a bit borderline, as this is not like a classic API token where this
> causes active service disruption.

ack, FWIW, I checked what we do for classic API tokens, and while it's
of course not the exact same thing, it seemed similar enough to use the
same semantics here.

> OTOH. setting that flag hasn't that big of an impact and doesn't really
> hurt either, so fine. I'd just avoid using it for everything that can be
> framed as destructive, as most things with a confirmation prompts might be,
> as then it looses the punch a bit (or could again just be the default).
> But when implementing these yesterday I also could not come up with a
> definitive rule that always holds, so certainly not a clear cut - just
> wanted to avoid that we use this to liberally now - as said, here it was
> OK to do (except the short missing rationale).

I'll make sure to ask for a more detailed rationale in the commit
message next time, or add one myself if done easily enough!

Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Thomas Lamprecht]

Am 28.05.26 um 12:01 schrieb Lukas Wagner:
> On Thu May 28, 2026 at 11:54 AM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> IMO a bit borderline, as this is not like a classic API token where this
>> causes active service disruption.
> ack, FWIW, I checked what we do for classic API tokens, and while it's
> of course not the exact same thing, it seemed similar enough to use the
> same semantics here.

Actually I went back and forth a bit on exactly those yesterday, less because
of impact but more as each such sets basically a precedent ^^ But ultimately
decided that it's probably fine to err on the side of caution, especially on
removals and also with the not so big UI/UX impact here; that's why it's
also fine here.

So all good, just wanted to give slightly more context of my thoughts here.
And btw. my trigger for changing the confirm prompt in the first place was
the flashy red error icon that sprung into me when opening the "apply pending"
subscription prompt the first time after getting some distance from testing it
and me then thinking "wait, did I press a delete button".

Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager] ui: auto-installer: mark regenerating auto installer tokens as dangerous

[Shannon Sterz]

On Thu May 28, 2026 at 11:54 AM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Thx for the patch and the quick apply. FWIW this is missing commit
> message body and none added on applying, a short sentence here would
> be appreciated.
>
> Am 28.05.26 um 11:25 schrieb Shannon Sterz:
>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>  ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
>> index 3732ffe..0ee5afc 100644
>> --- a/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
>> +++ b/ui/src/remotes/auto_installer/token_panel.rs
>> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ impl LoadableComponent for AuthTokenPanelComponent {
>>                          All existing ISOs with this token will lose access!"
>>                      ))
>>                      .disabled(self.selection.is_empty())
>> +                    .dangerous(true)
>>                      .on_activate(link.callback(|_| Message::RegenerateSecret)),
>>              )
>>              .with_flex_spacer()
>
> IMO a bit borderline, as this is not like a classic API token where this
> causes active service disruption.
> OTOH. setting that flag hasn't that big of an impact and doesn't really
> hurt either, so fine. I'd just avoid using it for everything that can be
> framed as destructive, as most things with a confirmation prompts might be,
> as then it looses the punch a bit (or could again just be the default).
> But when implementing these yesterday I also could not come up with a
> definitive rule that always holds, so certainly not a clear cut - just
> wanted to avoid that we use this to liberally now - as said, here it was
> OK to do (except the short missing rationale).

ack, i'll add a rationale next time.