On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 09:28:20AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > I was recently talking with jmw, and told him I was surprised to get > an NM assigned as I had set myself as inactive, although I didn't > lower my number of available slots. He asked me to file a bug, because > from the FD view, he does not even see the "active" column.
Indeed the "active" bit is not shown, and not considered by the code used to list the AMs (be them free or not free). See backends.modeles.AM.list_available(): https://salsa.debian.org/nm-team/nm.debian.org/blob/master/backend/models.py#L872 > I am marking the bug as minor as it _might_ be right; turns out, my > "active" bit was still marked as present. There might be a usability > issue somewhere, but I cannot pin-point it. But I do believe this > brings unnecessary redundancy - Why do we have both selectors? Isn't > "available=false" equivalent to "slots=0"? Enrico needs to answer this question, but indeed my proposed fix would be to get away without the available selector. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
