Hi, The main reason why I think we should get all of the three states is we don't know exactly if those plugins (which developer didn't specify) are compatible or not, so we should not make any assumptions and prevent the user from enabling any plugins she/he wants. The best we can do here is to provide all of the information plugin developer knows, directly to the user, without us in the middle who make decisions based on incomplete data.
So lets ask plugin developer to specify a set of components which he tested his plugin with. Plus a list of components which he tested with and he is sure that those are not going to working together. On UI we can show explicitly, that this combination is tested and approved to be working, another combination is not working for sure (plugin developers tested it and explicitly specified), and there will be a lot of combination which are going to work together without problems, but we should say the user, that the developer didn't test it and he should test and use it carefully. Thanks, On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Andriy Popovych <apopov...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi fuelers, > > Currently we are working on feature component registry [1] which should > help us to prevent not logical compositions of different components in > wizard tab during cluster(environment) creation. Now we have a mechanizm > of 'restrictions' which is not flexible for components provided by > plugins. In our current approach we have two states for components - > compatible/incompatible which are described in compatibility matrix > based on OpenStack components (For example: cinder-vmware storage only > compatible with vCetner hypervisor and should work when only KVM uses). > In this case we allow user to choose only that components we defently > know works well with each other. Another approach tell us to have 3 > states: compatible/incompatible/ and all other components about > compatibility with others we know nothing. In that case we should show > on wizard which components compatible, which not, and others which user > can enable on his own risk. So I need your opinions: should we allow for > user choose only that coponents which are tested and defently works or > prevent her/him from choosing which are defently not works and means > potentional risk of failing deployment when component about we know > nothing isn't work together. > > > > [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/component-registry > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
