Bug 1459344 - Multiselect element does not propagate to provision object
Summary: Multiselect element does not propagate to provision object
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Automate
Version: 5.7.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: GA
: cfme-future
Assignee: Drew Bomhof
QA Contact: Shveta
URL:
Whiteboard: service:dialog
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-06-06 21:22 UTC by Brant Evans
Modified: 2018-10-02 14:32 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-10-02 14:29:54 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: ---
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Brant Evans 2017-06-06 21:22:51 UTC
Description of problem:
With a service dialog that contains a drop-down element with Multiselect enabled the provision object does not contain the :dialog_element_name in prov.options hash. It is available from the prov.miq_request.options[:dialog] element, but the format is not easily consumed (key is Array::dialog_element_name and the value is a comma separated string).

In my case I have a dialog element called tower_jobs. To find the submitted contents I used the rails console.

Get the miq_provision object for the provision that was initiated:

prov = $evm.vmdb(:miq_provision,1000000000103)


print out the options of the provision object:

pp prov.options; nil

{:initial_pass=>true,
 :service_template_request=>false,
 :miq_request_dialog_name=>"miq_provision_redhat_dialogs_template",
 :requester_enabled=>["disabled"],
 :purpose_enabled=>["disabled"],
 :current_tab_key=>:customize,
 :owner_phone=>nil,
 :owner_country=>nil,
 :owner_phone_mobile=>nil,
 :owner_title=>nil,
 :owner_first_name=>nil,
 :owner_manager=>nil,
 :owner_address=>nil,
 :owner_company=>nil,
 :owner_last_name=>nil,
 :owner_manager_mail=>nil,
 :owner_city=>nil,
 :owner_department=>nil,
 :owner_load_ldap=>nil,
 :owner_manager_phone=>nil,
 :owner_state=>nil,
 :owner_office=>nil,
 :owner_zip=>nil,
 :owner_email=>nil,
 :request_notes=>nil,
 :vm_tags=>[],
 :customization_template_script=>nil,
 :dns_servers=>nil,
 :dns_suffixes=>nil,
 :root_password=>nil,
 :addr_mode=>["dhcp", "DHCP"],
 :gateway=>nil,
 :hostname=>nil,
 :ip_addr=>nil,
 :subnet_mask=>nil,
 :placement_cluster_name=>[1000000000001, "Default"],
 :cluster_filter=>[nil, nil],
 :placement_auto=>[true, 1],
 :placement_dc_name=>[nil, nil],
 :number_of_vms=>[1, "1"],
 :vm_description=>nil,
 :vm_prefix=>nil,
 :src_vm_id=>[1000000000014, "RHEL-7.2-with-tower"],
 :provision_type=>["native_clone", "Native Clone"],
 :linked_clone=>[nil, nil],
 :vm_name=>"mrx0025",
 :pxe_server_id=>[nil, nil],
 :schedule_type=>["immediately", "Immediately on Approval"],
 :vm_auto_start=>[true, 1],
 :schedule_time=>Wed, 31 May 2017 15:20:00 UTC +00:00,
 :retirement=>2592000,
 :retirement_warn=>[604800, "1 Week"],
 :stateless=>[false, 0],
 :vlan=>"rhevm",
 :mac_address=>nil,
 :disk_format=>["default", "Default"],
 :number_of_sockets=>1,
 :cores_per_socket=>[1, "1"],
 :vm_memory=>1024,
 :memory_reserve=>nil,
 :network_adapters=>[1, "1"],
 :start_date=>"5/31/2017",
 :start_hour=>"15",
 :start_min=>"20",
 :name=>"RHEL 7",
 :description=>"RHEL 7",
 :long_description=>"",
 :provision_cost=>nil,
 :display=>true,
 :catalog_id=>1000000000001,
 :st_prov_type=>"redhat",
 :available_catalogs=>[["VTC", 1000000000001]],
 :retire_fqname=>"/Service/Retirement/StateMachines/ServiceRetirement/Default",
 :reconfigure_fqname=>"",
 :fqname=>
  "/Service/Provisioning/StateMachines/ServiceProvision_Template/CatalogItemInitialization",
 :available_dialogs=>
  {1000000000001=>"azure-single-vm-from-user-image",
   1000000000002=>"Provision VM"},
 :service_type=>"atomic",
 :dialog_id=>1000000000002,
 :placement_host_name=>[nil, nil],
 :placement_ds_name=>[nil, nil],
 :src_vm_nics=>[],
 :src_vm_lans=>[],
 :customize_enabled=>["enabled"],
 :src_ems_id=>[1000000000001, "RHEV"],
 :requester_group=>"EvmGroup-super_administrator",
 :delivered_on=>nil,
 :customization_template_id=>[nil, nil],
 :pass=>0,
 :miq_force_unique_name=>[true, 1],
 :service_guid=>"be4291d2-4af8-11e7-b33b-52540096a458",
 :service_resource_id=>1000000000058,
 :owner_group=>"EvmGroup-super_administrator",
 :dns_domain=>nil,
 :vm_target_name=>"mrx0025",
 :vm_target_hostname=>"mrx0025",
 :linux_host_name=>"mrx0025",
 :service_name=>"x",
 :dialog_service_name=>"x",
 :dialog_number_of_sockets=>1,
 :dialog_vm_memory=>1024,
 :dialog_placement_cluster_name=>"Default",
 :dialog_vlan=>"rhevm",
 :domain_name=>"vmnet-bevans.redhat.com",
 :dialog_domain_name=>"vmnet-bevans.redhat.com",
 :dialog_retirement=>2592000,
 :linux_domain_name=>"vmnet-bevans.redhat.com",
 :sysprep_domain_name=>"vmnet-bevans.redhat.com",
 :vm_notes=>"Owner:  \nEmail: \nSource Template: RHEL-7.2-with-tower",
 :dest_cluster=>[1000000000001, "Default"],
 :networks=>[{:network=>"rhevm", :mac_address=>nil}]}


Notice that there is no :dialog_tower_jobs


Look at the dialog options on the request:

pp prov.miq_request.options[:dialog]; nil

{"dialog_service_name"=>"x",
 "dialog_number_of_sockets"=>1,
 "dialog_vm_memory"=>1024,
 "dialog_placement_cluster_name"=>"Default",
 "dialog_vlan"=>"rhevm",
 "dialog_domain_name"=>"vmnet-bevans.redhat.com",
 "dialog_retirement"=>2592000,
 "Array::dialog_tower_jobs"=>"* Install PostgreSQL Server,*_Install_Apache"}



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

5.7.2

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create Service Dialog with a Multiselect enabled drop-down
2. Create Catalog Item to provision a VM using Service Dialog
3. Provision VM from Service Catalog
4. Inspect provision object via rails console or have automate method that logs the provision and request objects options.

Actual results:
dialog element NOT present in options of provision object

Expected results:
dialog element IS present in options of provision object

Additional info:

Comment 2 Dave Johnson 2017-06-12 20:33:43 UTC
Brant, please fill in severity, ie. what is the customer impact with this one?  Currently setting to medium but please weigh in if you feel its higher than that.

Use this as a guide...  
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_severity

Comment 3 Brant Evans 2017-06-12 23:59:38 UTC
Dave,

I agree with the medium severity. I am able to work around the issue by getting the data from the request object.

Comment 5 CFME Bot 2018-03-28 21:42:20 UTC
New commit detected on ManageIQ/manageiq-content/master:

https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-content/commit/ee334646b63b32fa176d86cb5425325811e7510f
commit ee334646b63b32fa176d86cb5425325811e7510f
Author:     mkanoor <mkanoor>
AuthorDate: Fri Mar  2 11:21:02 2018 -0500
Commit:     mkanoor <mkanoor>
CommitDate: Fri Mar  2 11:21:02 2018 -0500

    Updated spec for dialog_parser

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1459344
    Based on PR https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-content/pull/253

 spec/automation/unit/method_validation/dialog_parser_spec.rb | 23 +-
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comment 6 Josh Carter 2018-10-02 14:29:54 UTC
Dear customer, 

The CloudForms team is reviewing the current CloudForms Bug(defect) backlog in order to target engineering efforts. We are closing any bugs for versions that no longer have an active errata stream or that have hit their age limit. We are committing to better management of the backlog as we move forward. If you have an bug that you are still able to reproduce on a current version of CloudForms please open a new bug. 

If you have any concerns about this, please let us know.

Thanks and regards!

Comment 7 Josh Carter 2018-10-02 14:32:34 UTC
Dear customer, 

The CloudForms team is reviewing the current CloudForms Bug(defect) backlog in order to target engineering efforts. We are closing any bugs for versions that no longer have an active errata stream or that have hit their age limit. We are committing to better management of the backlog as we move forward. If you have an bug that you are still able to reproduce on a current version of CloudForms please open a new bug. 

If you have any concerns about this, please let us know.

Thanks and regards!


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