From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 AA15D82E7 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:54:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8143B34EE6 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:53:34 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:53:34 +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 BF90C4778B for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:53:33 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1ab8d642-cf29-4635-87db-45acb0051d1d@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:53:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion , Dominik Csapak , Wolfgang Bumiller References: <20230810100902.714456-1-p.hufnagl@proxmox.com> <119c8829-8f7a-4269-9436-b39e9242dece@proxmox.com> <40cdc2c8-c24a-4e58-94cc-b82ee7c81147@proxmox.com> From: Philipp Hufnagl In-Reply-To: <40cdc2c8-c24a-4e58-94cc-b82ee7c81147@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.004 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] applied: [PATCH manager v4 0/2] fix #474: allow transfer from container/vms X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:54:04 -0000 On 8/24/23 16:46, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 14/08/2023 um 12:42 schrieb Dominik Csapak: >> On 8/14/23 12:36, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: >>> applied, thanks >>> >>> @Dominik: does extjs have an 'enableFn' for rows in a grid? >>> IMO we should either disable the ones with pools when the transfer >>> checkbox is not checked, or hide them (but when hiding them after >>> already checking them... it's weird) >>> Or disable the 'Add' button if a VM with a pool is checked? >>> >> 'enableFn' is our invention ;) and no that only works for some of our components >> >> >> looking just now at the gui patch, i would have approached it a bit differently: >> >> always enable the 'transfer' property but show a 'warning' box when one is selected >> with an old pool >> >> since 'Allow Transfer' is rather non-descriptive (and no documentation is included) > +1, FWIW I had no idea what this series is about from just reading the subject, > as "pool" is not mentioned there. > >> and it adds needless friction on change >> (i select a vm, click, get an error, have to select the vm again, click transfer, click button..) > > > We normally use "move" or "migrate", not "transfer", or "reassign" (like for > moving a guest disk to another guest) and it has some merits to not expand the > commonly used (parameter) naming scheme to much, but oh well it's already released > and a naming nit that doesn't matters _that_ much. > > But the default isn't declared in the schema, please send a follow up for that. > > And I agree with Dominik, UX isn't ideal, a warning that one or more VMID will > be moved out of there old Pool, if any, would be sufficient. Not sure if it'd be > better if that's a per-row hint, shown if the row is ticked (e.g., instead of the > Pool column) or a edit-window wide warning hint that gets made visible if any of > the selected VMIDs is in a Pool already. > > FWIW, and not directly related (i.e., can be it's own series), you could also fix > the s/Virtual Machine/Virtual Guest/ wording to avoid the confusion that one also > adds Container over this interface. Sorry for the issue. It has been my first Patch on this scale. I will make a new patch Improving the user experience by renaming to "migrate" or "migrate from other pool" and fix the schema As for the feature design itself: The UI could be improved by only showing vms assinged to a pool when the transfer/migrade check box is checked. This way it should be clear if it is a migration without the use of a popup. Would that work? Feedback is most welcome :)