> This is absolutely true. We had, at one time, considered adding a state > machine (or similar) to Foreman, so that such things (as well as boot > loops in Kickstart, and so forth) could be detected, but it was never > completed. >
State machine would be nice as it allows for more actions to be taken for a machine in different states. For example, in some other threads, I was asking about ability to use RemoteExec for discovered hosts, not just managed hosts as it is now. Proper hooks for systems entering/leaving any of those states also open up a lot of opportunities. > As Lukas says, a full refactor may well happen, and we'd love input on > that as we go forward. Any of you, guys, going to PuppetConf this year? If so, can we meet and have a discussion on this maybe? I think I agree - the hosts should keep retrying until they get a > response from Foreman, but then actions can be taken. I'd probably be > in favour of keeping the retry (so that, say, if the offending MAC is > removed in Foreman, the host can register on the next retry), but > perhaps split the process into two calls. The first is a light "am I > registered?" call that returns true/false, and only if false would the > heavier registration call be made. Does that work? > Yes, this would definitely work. This is also is one of the states of a system in the state machine we talked about above. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
