scottyaslan commented on PR #10399: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/10399#issuecomment-3463488191
> I think we need to rethink the error handling strategy for policies at least. in the old ui, we'd try to get the policies and it would fail, the result would just be to not enable the New Policy button. now, there is no prior check on policies before offering the Manage Policies action. It subsequently looks up the policies, and other things. if that fails we display a snackbar with the error, but the dialog still comes up and the add button in there is enabled. I would think the Manage Access action would be disabled if we can determine this isn't configured: > >  [  ](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/713866/504365654-c837a1b4-dd65-40a6-93f7-361bc358a25e.gif?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3NjE3NTk3NDgsIm5iZiI6MTc2MTc1OTQ0OCwicGF0aCI6Ii83MTM4NjYvNTA0MzY1NjU0LWM4MzdhMWI0LWRkNjUtNDBhNi05M2Y3LTM2MWJjMzU4YTI1ZS5 naWY_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjUxMDI5JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI1MTAyOVQxNzM3MjhaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT1mNThkNWY0MDA2ZWFkYTc0Nzc0YjI0MDgzYTU3YWRiZTQxYTk5YjdhZTI3YmM0YjNkNjM2YWVmOWFiNmY0N2ZlJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCJ9._a0VbQ3_2x6moJkzlNWXwimpBm6CeZIbTf5XVcQYqT0) [ ](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/713866/504365654-c837a1b4-dd65-40a6-93f7-361bc358a25e.gif?jwt=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3NjE3NTk3NDgsIm5iZiI6MTc2MTc1OTQ0OCwicGF0aCI6Ii83MTM4NjYvNTA0MzY1NjU0LWM4MzdhMWI0LWRkNjUtNDBhNi05M2Y3LTM2MWJjMzU4YTI1ZS5naWY_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjUxMDI5JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI1MTAyOVQxNzM3MjhaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJ lgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT1mNThkNWY0MDA2ZWFkYTc0Nzc0YjI0MDgzYTU3YWRiZTQxYTk5YjdhZTI3YmM0YjNkNjM2YWVmOWFiNmY0N2ZlJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCJ9._a0VbQ3_2x6moJkzlNWXwimpBm6CeZIbTf5XVcQYqT0) I have updated the UX here. The policies and tenants are loaded from /policies, /tenants/users, and /tenants/user-groups. Those endpoint return all policies and tenants. The frontend filters those for the particular bucket the user has selected to manage access to. This filtered list is displayed in the table. That data is requested once and set in the store. Separately the user can have rights to create new policies on a bucket. That's what the + button is. When the user adds/removes a policy the frontend only updates the information in the store via the reducer. This is troublesome when the store has not been populated as the reducer is unable to find the policy to add/remove/update etc. I think the simplest solution here would be to update this dialog such that if the initial call to get policies and tenants fails when the manage access dialog is opened then the error banner is displayed only. The user must close the dialog and reopen it to try again. The user cannot add/remove /update policies on a bucket if the current policies fail to load. <img width="720" height="311" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6c60a550-bc89-4bf8-bd30-17e792fdd12f"; /> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
