Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1213766

Summary: [BLOCKED]Move units to the right hand side of the number in threshold parameters.
Product: [oVirt] ovirt-engine Reporter: Vered Volansky <vered>
Component: Frontend.WebAdminAssignee: Tal Nisan <tnisan>
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED QA Contact: Raz Tamir <ratamir>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: ---CC: amureini, bugs, lsurette, mgoldboi, rbalakri, srevivo, tnisan, ykaul, ylavi
Target Milestone: ---Flags: ylavi: ovirt-4.2+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-07-24 13:31:44 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Storage RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 1185839, 1219535    
Bug Blocks:    
Attachments:
Description Flags
screenshot none

Description Vered Volansky 2015-04-21 08:59:19 UTC 
Two threshold parameters in New/Edit Storage Domain Dialog advanced parameters section:
Low Space Indicator (%) n
Critical Space Action Blocker (GB) n

% and GB should move to the left of n, with no brackets.
Comment 1 Vered Volansky 2015-05-07 11:24:32 UTC 
Created attachment 1023078 [details]
screenshot
Comment 2 Vered Volansky 2015-05-07 11:25:44 UTC 
Attached is a screenshot of the current state, where % and GB are in brackets.
By Eldan's design, they should appear after the numbers textboxes.
Einav, do we have infrastructure for this? If not is it possible to add it?
Comment 3 Einav Cohen 2015-05-07 13:41:54 UTC 
(In reply to Vered Volansky from comment #2)
> Attached is a screenshot of the current state, where % and GB are in
> brackets.
> By Eldan's design, they should appear after the numbers textboxes.
> Einav, do we have infrastructure for this? If not is it possible to add it?

Hi Vered, Eldan's design is correct, however we don't have the infrastructure for it AFAIK; moreover, it is inconsistent with other places in the GUI at the moment [http://i.imgur.com/yVWjBZG.png]. 
I suggest to keep it as is, and once our dialogs will adopt the PatternFly styling, we will have a built-in way for adding prefixes/postfixes for fields, if necessary (see http://i.imgur.com/NM2Urzw.png - taken from [1]). 

[1] http://getbootstrap.com/css/#forms
Comment 4 Allon Mureinik 2015-05-07 13:53:58 UTC 
Thanks for the detailed answer Einav.
Do we have an RFE to track moving the dialogs to patternfly so we can block this BZ on it?
Comment 5 Einav Cohen 2015-05-07 14:16:06 UTC 
(In reply to Allon Mureinik from comment #4)
> Thanks for the detailed answer Einav.
> Do we have an RFE to track moving the dialogs to patternfly so we can block
> this BZ on it?

opened, blocked, done. :)
Comment 6 Einav Cohen 2015-05-07 14:19:32 UTC 
(In reply to Einav Cohen from comment #5)
> (In reply to Allon Mureinik from comment #4)
> > Thanks for the detailed answer Einav.
> > Do we have an RFE to track moving the dialogs to patternfly so we can block
> > this BZ on it?
> 
> opened, blocked, done. :)

to be more accurate: I opened one specifically for providing ui infrastructure support for right-hand-side units in dialog fields. this theoretically may or may not be implemented using PatternFly, although I am very inclined towards waiting for PatternFly in this context. I don't have an RFE for moving dialogs to PatternFly (yet...).
Comment 7 Red Hat Bugzilla Rules Engine 2015-10-19 10:55:49 UTC 
Target release should be placed once a package build is known to fix a issue. Since this bug is not modified, the target version has been reset. Please use target milestone to plan a fix for a oVirt release.
Comment 11 Allon Mureinik 2017-07-24 13:31:44 UTC 
This depends on bug 1219535, which is not targetted, and it doesn't seem it's ever going to happen - Closing.

If this assumption is invalidated, feel free to reopen.