Could we perhaps go with option 1 in the CLI/API and then for the UI, warn users that the org has hosts (but allow them to continue if they click ok)?
David On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Stephen Benjamin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Marek Hulán" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: "Tom McKay" <[email protected]>, "ohadlevy" < > [email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 10:37:23 AM > > Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Org with host deletion question > > > > Hello > > > > I lean towards the second atm, if taxonomies are enabled we should not > add > > more actions leading to hosts being unassociated. I consider host without > > organization in organization enabled instance as a bug. Long term I'd > like to > > see all hosts that are unassociated today being in fact associated to > some > > default org. Once we have that, we could set the host association to > this new > > default org on organization deletion. > > Yea but the default org stuff is just totally broken. We tried to set this > by default (there are settings to do this) and stuff explodes because > Puppet > parser generated objects don't get in a taxonomy. It's not trivial at all. > > > Anyway if there are more votes for option 1, I as a user would like to > know > > that there were some hosts that were moved to the unasssociated hosts > bucket. > > At least a warning would be good. > > I would vote for disassociating, the "XX is still used by YY" errors in > Foreman > are very frustrating, and in this case I don't think it's especially > unwarranted. > Giving the user a warning saves them a lot of hassle. If the hosts aren't > useful > anymore, they can then go and delete them, or if they want to keep using > them, > assign them to new orgs/locations. > > > > -- > > Marek > > > > On Wednesday 08 of June 2016 16:23:48 Tom McKay wrote: > > > To me, as a user, if I delete an org (or location) I'd simply want the > > > foreman resources to be unassociated from it. It may be the case, for > > > example, that a resource like a provisioning template is shared among > > > multiple orgs. A host is different, I know, in that it can belong to > only > > > one org but I would still lean towards consistency by throwing it into > the > > > bucket of unassociated hosts. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Partha Aji <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > While working on one of the org deletion bugs ( > > > > http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/15336) I hit upon this > > > > inconsistency in Foreman code base and would like suggestions on the > > > > agreeable behavior. > > > > > > > > So here is the user action > > > > 1) User creates an org > > > > 2) Assigns a host to that org > > > > 3) Deletes that org > > > > > > > > There seem to be 2 different approaches taken in the foreman code > > > > 1) > > > > > https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/blob/develop/app/models/taxonomies/o > > > > rganization.rb#L8 seems to indicate the intention to nullify the > > > > organization-host > > > > association if organization gets deleted. This tells me that its ok > to > > > > delete the org with hosts associated to it. > > > > "has_many_hosts :dependent => :nullify" > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/blob/develop/test/functional/api/v2/ > > > > locations_controller_test.rb#L74 seems to indicate we do Not want to > > > > delete orgs/locations if hosts are attached to it. "should NOT > destroy > > > > location if hosts use it" . > > > > > > > > Looking at the commit dates for both, they were merged a mere month > after > > > > each other (jan - feb 2013). 2 came before 1 . > > > > > > > > I prefer 1 over 2 .. Unassociate the Org from the Host if the org > gets > > > > deleted instead of blocking the delete. Whats your preferred > approach. > > > > Kindly let me know. > > > > > > > > Partha > > > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > > "foreman-dev" group. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an > > > > email to [email protected]. > > > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "foreman-dev" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to [email protected]. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
