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 9F8AB64E58
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:29:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8D7CB5220
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:29:06 +0100 (CET)
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))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 7B20D5215
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:29:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4DB9946ED5
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:29:05 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <01a4001b-4f8e-1678-d460-b1846373085d@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 14:29:03 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.6.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20211115150209.717122-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
<20211115150209.717122-2-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
<ccf1d4db-f022-0a45-e8d3-3f8e8a9e8c7a@proxmox.com>
From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <ccf1d4db-f022-0a45-e8d3-3f8e8a9e8c7a@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.012 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 manager 1/3] ui: lxc/qemu: add disk
reassign
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: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 13:29:36 -0000
On 2/21/22 16:44, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> sorry for the late review
>
> some comments inline
>
> On 11/15/21 16:02, Aaron Lauterer wrote:
[...]
>> diff --git a/www/manager6/lxc/Resources.js
>> b/www/manager6/lxc/Resources.js index 15ee3c67..bec7cf14 100644 ---
>> a/www/manager6/lxc/Resources.js +++
>> b/www/manager6/lxc/Resources.js @@ -156,6 +156,11 @@
>> Ext.define('PVE.lxc.RessourceView', { return; } + if
>> (rec.data.key.match(/^unused/)) { + Ext.Msg.alert('Error',
>> gettext('Not yet supported for unused volumes')); + return;
>> + } +
>
> since we already hide/disable that button accordingly, why have that
> error message at all? if the user somehow shows the button via the
> browser console, the api will return an error anyway..
>
> that way, we'd save a gettext
good point
>
[..]
>> @@ -227,12 +250,40 @@ Ext.define('PVE.lxc.RessourceView', { }, });
>> - var move_btn = new Proxmox.button.Button({ + let
>> reassign_menuitem = new Ext.menu.Item({ + text:
>> gettext('Reassign volume'), + tooltip: gettext('Reassign
>> volume to another VM'), + handler: run_reassign, +
>> iconCls: 'fa fa-mail-forward', + reference:
>> 'reassing_item', + }); + + let move_btn = new
>> PVE.button.Split({ text: gettext('Move Volume'), selModel:
>> me.selModel, disabled: true, dangerous: true, handler: run_move, +
>> menu: { + items: [reassign_menuitem], + }, + });
>> + + // needed until we can move unused volumes to other
>> storages + let reassign_btn = new Proxmox.button.Button({ +
>> text: gettext('Reassign volume'), + tooltip:
>> gettext('Reassign volume to another VM'), + handler:
>> run_reassign, + selModel: me.selModel, + hidden:
>> true, + listeners: { + render: function(btn) { +
>> // hack: avoid layout-flickering due to size change, use max width
>> for both + let maxWidth = Math.max(btn.getSize().width,
>> move_btn.getSize().width); + move_btn.setSize({ width:
>> maxWidth }); + btn.setSize({ width: maxWidth });
>
> mhmm... while for remove/detach disks this seems to work ok, for this
> the gettext are so different, the reassign button look very weird..
>
> maybe putting both in a menu (where the top button itself has no
> action) and disable accordingly would make more sense here?
>
> i.e. Volume/Disk Actions - Resize - Move - relocate
>
> ?
Sounds like a good plan and as quickly discussed off list, will also make it easier to look consistent in different transla
tions.
> [...]
>> diff --git a/www/manager6/qemu/HDReassign.js
>> b/www/manager6/qemu/HDReassign.js new file mode 100644 index
>> 00000000..e6b59cb4
[..]
>> + + reassign_disk: function(values) {
>
> this should probably be 'reassignDisk' according to our usual naming
> scheme
thx for catching that
>
>> + let me = this; + let view = me.getView(); +
>> let qemu = view.qemu; + let params = { + vmid:
>> view.vmid, + 'target-vmid': values.targetVmid, + };
>> + + params[qemu ? 'disk' : 'volume'] = view.disk; + +
>> if (view.qemu) { + params['target-disk'] =
>> `${values.controller}${values.deviceid}`; + } else { +
>> params['target-volume'] = `${values.mpType}${values.mpId}`; +
>> } + + let url =
>> `/nodes/${view.nodename}/${view.type}/${view.vmid}/`; + url
>> += qemu ? 'move_disk' : 'move_volume'; + +
>> Proxmox.Utils.API2Request({ + params: params, + url:
>> url, + waitMsgTarget: me.getView(), + method:
>> 'POST', + failure: response => Ext.Msg.alert('Error',
>> response.htmlStatus), + success: function(response, options)
>> { + let upid = response.result.data; +
>> view.hide(); + Ext.create('Proxmox.window.TaskProgress',
>> { + upid, + autoShow: true, +
>> taskDone: success => success ? view.close() : view.show(),
>
> so if the task is not successful, we show ourselves again (over the
> error of the progress window)? what about the task log window (if
> opened)?
As discussed off list, closing the window always is what we want. In case of errors, we do see the error window or have the task log opened.
>
>> + }); + }, + }); + }, + +
>> validateForm: function(fp, isValid) { +
>> this.getView().lookup('submitButton').setDisabled(!isValid); +
>> }, + + onReassignClick: function() { + let me = this; +
>> let view = me.getView(); + let form =
>> view.lookup('moveFormPanel').getForm(); + if
>> (form.isValid()) { +
>> me.reassign_disk(form.getValues()); + } + }, + +
>> onMpTypeChange: function(value) { +
>> this.getView().getViewModel().set('mpType', value.getValue()); +
>> this.getView().lookup('mpIdSelector').validate(); + },
>
> these functions make me question if it wouldn't have been easier to
> use an 'edit window' instead? any reason for that?
It has been a while since I sent these patches, but I think there were a few reasons to go with a regular window. One of them IIRC was that, similar to the resize and move windows, we also want to show a custom labeled button "Reassign {Volume|Disk}" instead of "OK" or one of the options we have with the edit window.
>
>> + + onTargetVMChange: function(f, vmid) { + let me =
>> this; + let view = me.getView(); + let diskSelector =
>> view.lookup('diskSelector'); + if (!vmid) { +
>> diskSelector.setVMConfig(null); + me.VMConfig = null; +
>> return; + } + + let type = view.type === 'qemu' ?
>> 'qemu' : 'lxc';
>
> here you use 'view.type' but above you use 'view.qemu' ? i'd prefer
> to have a consistent way of checking the type
True, I also found another instance and aligned them.
[...]
>> listeners: { + validitychange: 'validateForm', + }, +
>> items: [ + { + xtype: 'displayfield', +
>> name: 'sourceDisk', + cbind: { + name: get =>
>> get('isQemu') ? 'disk' : 'volume', + fieldLabel: get =>
>> get('isQemu') + ? gettext('Source Disk') +
>> : gettext('Source Mount Point'),
>
> wouldn't 'Source' suffice for both? IMHO the context is enough that
> the user knows that it's a disk/mp
Good point