Bug 787651

Summary: No way to create multiple instance in an application (deployment) from UI
Product: [Retired] CloudForms Cloud Engine Reporter: Shveta <ssachdev>
Component: aeolus-conductorAssignee: Angus Thomas <athomas>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: wes hayutin <whayutin>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 1.0.0CC: akarol, deltacloud-maint, ssachdev
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-02-22 23:42:42 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Shveta 2012-02-06 12:23:36 UTC 
Description of problem:


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. There are two ways to create a deployable 
2. Build from command line --> aeolus-image build 
3. push from command line  --> aeolus-image push
4. Create a deployable definition with multiple assemblies 
5. Launch .
Many instance in one application will be created.

Same cannot be done from UI.
1. Build from command line
2. Clouds --> Component Outlines --> component outline will be created
3. Click on it and upload , image will be pushed
4. "new deployable from component outline" 
deployable will be created in default catalog and now launch
5. Only one instance will be launched in one application.

In short is there any way to launch multiple instance in one application from UI.
If not then we can always create only one instance in one application . 
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Angus Thomas 2012-02-06 12:29:25 UTC 
The UI offers the ability to edit deployable XML, at which point the user could add the definition of another instance, without needing to go to the command line.

For 1.0, that's it.

In version-next, we need to improve this significantly.