Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 1190323 - On 'Discovery_rule page, host limit should be marked as mandatory variable and validation error needs to be rephrased
On 'Discovery_rule page, host limit should be marked as mandatory variable an...
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat Satellite 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: WebUI (Show other bugs)
6.1.0
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity medium (vote)
: Unspecified
: Unused
Assigned To: orabin
Sachin Ghai
http://projects.theforeman.org/issues...
: Triaged
Depends On:
Blocks: 1193977
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2015-02-07 02:40 EST by Sachin Ghai
Modified: 2017-02-23 15:34 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-08-12 01:23:58 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
host limit is not marked as mandatory variable with (*).Also, If I set the host_limit blank, UI raises error "is not a number". which is misleading. (34.25 KB, image/png)
2015-02-07 02:40 EST, Sachin Ghai
no flags Details


External Trackers
Tracker ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Foreman Issue Tracker 9366 None None None 2016-04-22 11:49 EDT
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2015:1592 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: Red Hat Satellite 6.1.1 on RHEL 6 2015-08-12 05:04:35 EDT

  None (edit)
Description Sachin Ghai 2015-02-07 02:40:21 EST
Created attachment 989128 [details]
host limit is not marked as mandatory variable with (*).Also, If I set the host_limit blank, UI raises error "is not a number". which is misleading.

Description of problem:
On 'Discovery_rule page, host limit should be marked as mandatory variable with (*). 

If I set the host_limit blank, UI raises error "is not a number".
which is misleading. I set the host_limit blank, so Ideally UI should raise error: Host_limit can't be blank.

In short Host_limit should be consistent with Priority field.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Satellite-6.1.0-RHEL-6-20150205.0
Sat6.1 Beta snap1 compose3

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. create a  discovery rule with blank host_limit
2.
3.

Actual results:
 host limit is not marked as mandatory variable with (*). 

If I set the host_limit blank, UI raises error "is not a number".
which is misleading. 

Expected results:
Host limit should be marked as mandatory variable with (*). 

If I set the host_limit blank, so Ideally UI should raise error: Host_limit can't be blank.

Additional info:
Comment 2 Bryan Kearney 2015-02-23 10:05:00 EST
Upstream bug assigned to orabin@redhat.com
Comment 3 Bryan Kearney 2015-02-23 10:05:01 EST
Upstream bug assigned to orabin@redhat.com
Comment 4 Bryan Kearney 2015-03-16 10:05:04 EDT
Moving to POST since upstream bug http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/9366 has been closed
-------------
Ori Rabin
Applied in changeset commit:foreman_discovery|4c104cf6b66cf35931153e7d5643f6defd5d96a3.
Comment 7 Sachin Ghai 2015-04-08 05:52:15 EDT
Verified with snap11/rc5 (Satellite-6.1.0-RHEL-7-20150407.1).

Now if user leaves the host limit blank then UI auto sets the limit to '0' '0'== unlimited. Moving this to verified.
Comment 8 Bryan Kearney 2015-08-11 09:26:27 EDT
This bug is slated to be released with Satellite 6.1.
Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2015-08-12 01:23:58 EDT
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015:1592

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.