Bug 878495

Created attachment 678116 [details]
Current dialog

Created attachment 678117 [details]
Proposed dialog

Simon/Einav - please check the proposed dialog (attachment 678117 [details]), there are two changes comparing to the current dialog (attachment 6788116):

1. The first statement in the dialog - we open this kind of dialog for each VM with an already existing name, so I think "There already exists VM named: <vm_name>" is better than the current sentence: "Please select a name for the cloned VM(s) (<vm_name>)" + it doesn't contain the word "cloned"

2. "Cloned" is renamed to "Choose different name for the imported VM"

Is the proposed dialog OK ?

We are not just changing the name we also:
1. Change the UUID
2. Collapse snapshots into a new image. 

The above is a clone procedure same as you do when you clone from template. 
We need to make that clear, but I understand why just clone may be confusing.

So please add near the clone option saying "Import as a new cloned virtual machine (New name, IDs, and collapsed disk images)"

Please also explain that it's wither that or the suffix option - it's not clear

The user trying to import his VM from export domain doesn't care about what is happening in background, that's why word 'clone' in this context is confusing. I'm OK with 'Proposed dialog' screenshot.

(In reply to comment #5)
> The user trying to import his VM from export domain doesn't care about what
> is happening in background, that's why word 'clone' in this context is
> confusing. I'm OK with 'Proposed dialog' screenshot.

Well product management is not OK with the change, the fact that it's satisfies your single use case does not mean it satisfies all.

Just to fix the sum up of changes, we are not just changing the name we also:
1. Change the UUID - <visible to advanced/api users 
2. Collapse snapshots into a new image - Immediately impacts storage if the VM is based on template and advance user api user will notice.
3. Changes the virtual NICs MAC addresses - Visible to the VM user and may impact ifcfg scripts. 

You raised a valid concern about clarity of the current dialogue however, it is a clone by definition and should be state as such, period. We can only do better by informing what exactly we are going to do - so change name is definitely a misleading term. 

The same user when he notices the changes will immediately call support with questions. Farther more the clarification is important since the user may not want the above to happen and may prefer not to import or to delete the existing VM before importing  

Let's say: 
"Import as cloned. Changing name, MAC addresses, and cloning all disks removing all snapshots."

UUID, is not interesting in this message, it's implied. 

Livnat, Ayal, is this all we do or did I miss something?

Created attachment 684246 [details]
modified dialog for vm import conflict

Created attachment 684247 [details]
modified dialog for template import conflict

Simon, can you please check the two dialogs above (one for import VM conflict, and one for import Template conflict), if they're OK ?

(In reply to comment #9)
> Simon, can you please check the two dialogs above (one for import VM
> conflict, 

Import VM is OK.
I would drop the long description one line down to reduce the width of the dialogue. 

> and one for import Template conflict), if they're OK ?

We did not discuss import of existing templates in this thread.

This is a different discussion since there is an impact on VMs that the template is their parent image, please do not change anything yet and let's discuss over a new BZ - please describe current behavior for already existing:

1. Template with the same UUID 
2. Template with same name but different UUID  

We need to decide what to do with each - maybe we already have the right behavior.

https://gerrit.eng.lab.tlv.redhat.com/gitweb?p=ovirt-engine.git;a=commit;h=f5771e9b664d9d514784c6944fe635c6599414c0

ok, sf6.

3.2 has been released

3.2 has been released