[Ovirt-devel] oVirt testing

[Scott Seago]

Tim Allen wrote:
> comments below..
>
> On Jun 5, 2008, at 7:17 AM, Chris Lalancette wrote:
>
>> So I've started testing out the WUI, and here's what I've got for 
>> bugs so far
>> (in the order I found them, not in order of importance):
>>
>> 1.  In the "Host" tab, it displays a list of hosts; good.  However, 
>> when I check
>> a few of them and say "Delete", it doesn't actually do anything.
>>
1) "delete" should be "remove" -- I need to fix that -- it's supposed to 
move them to the 'default' pool.
2) are you in the 'default' pool when you're doing this? Maybe we should 
hide this button for the default pool, as it doesn't do anything useful
>> 2.  In the "Storage" tab, the distinction between "Add Storage 
>> Server" and
>> "Create Storage Server" is very, very unclear.  I'm not sure how to 
>> better
>> structure it, but first-time users are never going to figure it out.
> The design for this aims for it to be clearer.  Check out fig. 9a-9c 
> here >
> http://devserv.devel.redhat.com/~tallen/design/  I believe that scott 
> and co. were going to work on updating the build post-summit
Yes, the distinction is 'create' adds a new DB record and queries 
libvirt for volumes, and 'add' is, just like host add, moves a pool from 
another HW pool to here. The final design has this on a single tabbed popup.
>>
>> 5.  There are way too many "Are you sure?" popup boxes in the WUI.  
>> Just a
>> personal preference, but unless an action is undoable, you don't need 
>> a popup
>> box (they just get annoying).
> Most of these messages are supposed to be passive confirmation 
> messages that should be timed and require no user input.  Scott and I 
> talked about this earlier but perhaps there was a miscommunication.  
> Scott, are these placeholders?  Let me know if I should spec when we 
> need a passive vs. challenging messages.
Two types of popups here:
1) "Are you sure?" popups
2) passive confirmations after the action

For the "are you sure" popups, they're mostly used for delete and 
similar actions (cancel tasks, etc.) which are not undoable. I've noted 
one exception (disable host) that I need to fix.

For the confirmations, these were added to make it clear to the user 
that a certain action happened. i.e. "VM was created" They're not really 
placeholders, as I though we actually wanted to do basic javascript 
confirmations -- they don't have a yes/no choice, but they do need to be 
clicked.

The standard rails way of doing this (which doesn't work out-of-the-box 
anymore with the ajax stuff) is to put an alert message inline on the 
page which (I _think_) disappears after a few seconds. If you want a 
confirmation that doesn't require the user to click it, we should 
probably do something similar. not sure if we want this to be "yet 
another facebox popup" or if a simple inline div that we can update 
would be better though -- and I'm not sure _when_ this would fit into 
the roadmap.
>>
>>
>> 6.  Clicking the "Refresh" Button on a storage pool doesn't seem to 
>> do anything
>> (at least, it didn't add a new task to the database).
>>
I need to look into this. it should add a new task, but we have no UI to 
show this, so I may not have tested it properly.
>> 7.  Clicking on the "Delete" button on the lower part of the Storage 
>> page for a
>> storage pool doesn't seem to do anything; however, checking the 
>> storage pool and
>> clicking "Delete" on the upper part of the page does work.
>>
Another one to test again :-)
>> 8.  After deleting a storage pool, the summary for the now deleted 
>> storage pool
>> is still on the lower part of the page; that should probably be 
>> blanked out.
>>
This one is also a known issue -- I hadn't gotten around to fixing it 
yet. Lower priority than the 'delete doesn't work' bits, but hopefully I 
can track it down quickly
>> 9.  There's both a "Delete" button and "Remove" button on the Storage 
>> tab;
>> Delete does what it says, while Remove seems to do nothing.  I'm not 
>> sure what
>> the distinction between them is.
> The design aims to make the distinction clearer.  Check out fig. 9d > 
> http://devserv.devel.redhat.com/~tallen/design/
> I think this was a post-summit improvement also.  Scott?
This is for later -- we will put them together in a small dialog. The 
distinction, though, is analogous to the add vs. create one. "Delete" 
makes it go away, and "remove" moves it to 'default'
You might have been in the 'default' pool when you tried this -- again, 
we should probably hide this button in 'default'.

Scott