Bug 966277
| Summary: | Adding information to Details tab for Content View Definitions | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Satellite | Reporter: | David Caplan <dcaplan> | ||||
| Component: | Content Management | Assignee: | Brad Buckingham <bbuckingham> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Katello QA List <katello-qa-list> | ||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | Nightly | CC: | bbuckingham, bkearney, mmccune, omaciel | ||||
| Target Milestone: | Unspecified | Keywords: | 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: | 2014-03-11 20:09:18 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: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
Much of the information listed in the expected results is available in the UI. Since it is too much information for a single pane, it is structured per the UXD mockups. That said, more details can be added and we can work on improving the layout, if needed. We'll work with UXD to incorporate this feedback.
In the meantime, the following is where some of the items listed may be found:
1. Names of all Content Views published from selected Definition
(UI Location: Views pane)
2. Location of all accessible Content VIews and versions at those locations. This would: library and/or environments
(UI Location: Views pane)
3. Names of products and packages
(UI Location: Content pane (for products/repos),
Content Search : Details on packages in a given published view.)
4. Filter names applied and version ranges of included/excluded products if applicable
(UI Location: Not directly mapped as described)
5. Errata type and date range if applicable
(UI Location: Filters -> Filter Rules)
For the 'other classes', those are largely not addressed in the Content View Definitions UI.
Since this BZ was opened, new mockups have been created for the content view (CV) UI and the implementation for that is planned for a future release (e.g. 6.0.3). That said, the user may still find much of the information requested with the current implementation, as mentioned above. new CV work makes this irrelevant. |
Created attachment 751924 [details] Screen Shot of Content View Defn "Details" Selection Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: when selecting Content View Definition from table and then selecting "Details" there are no details provided. Actual results: Only the name, label and description are shown Expected results: The structure of the CV definition should be depicted as a delineation of constituent components: 1. Names of all Content Views published from selected Definition 2. Location of all accessible Content VIews and versions at those locations This would: library and/or environments 3. Names of products and packages 4. Filter names applied and version ranges of included/excluded products if applicable 5. Errata type and date range if applicable Other classes of information should include: 1. Total number of RPMs, Packages, Products (just the total of each type) 2. Total size in bytes of the Content 3. Membership in Composite Definition(s), parents identified Additional info: