Bug 1306925
Summary: | [RFE] Creating a host group allows os/media and partition table to be empty while they are mandatory fields | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Satellite | Reporter: | Kenny Tordeurs <ktordeur> |
Component: | API | Assignee: | satellite6-bugs <satellite6-bugs> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Katello QA List <katello-qa-list> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 6.1.6 | CC: | aperotti, bkearney, daniele, ktordeur, ohadlevy, satellite6-bugs |
Target Milestone: | Unspecified | Keywords: | FutureFeature, RFE, Triaged |
Target Release: | Unused | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2017-06-15 17:32:59 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 1353215 |
Description
Kenny Tordeurs
2016-02-12 08:33:28 UTC
Moving 6.2 bugs out to sat-backlog. A user is allowed to create a hostgroup which can be used without Provisioning. You are correct that if you expect to use host groups only for provisioning, then you don't have extra validation that provisioning is actually enabled / configured correctly. I would suggest to change this to an RFE to setup provisioning enabled Host group. Hi, the proposed change to this bugzilla looks to be already covered by this other RFE already opened: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311931 In that bugzilla a complete approach is suggested, to remove the provisioning data at all, and have provisioning as a new item to be linked to a hostgroup if needed. The situation here is that the actual results is: By UI all appears blank, but from API all fields but Architecture are still populated . While a coherent behaviour would be that the request should be rejected. Thank you for your interest in Satellite 6. We have evaluated this request, and we do not expect this to be implemented in product in the forseeable future. We are therefore closing this out as WONTFIX. If you have any concerns about this, please feel free to contact Rich Jerrido or Bryan Kearney. Thank you. |