Bug 61462 - [RFE] include system name in Scheduled Actions
Summary: [RFE] include system name in Scheduled Actions
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Network
Classification: Retired
Component: RHN/Web Site
Version: RHN Stable
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mike Orazi
QA Contact: Amy Owens
URL:
Whiteboard: US=17267
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2002-03-20 01:08 UTC by James Manning
Modified: 2008-10-15 13:23 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-10-15 13:23:34 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description James Manning 2002-03-20 01:08:10 UTC
The list of scheduled actions (in pending, completed and archived) doesn't include
the system name that the action will be against.  Can it?

Comment 1 James Manning 2002-03-20 01:13:03 UTC
off-topic, but why is /dev/null part of the cc: list?  Sounds like a bugzilla config thingy needs fixing :)


Comment 2 James Manning 2002-03-20 20:54:18 UTC
I didn't understand at the time that actions can encompass multiple systems, so this
RFE no longer makes sense, unless modified such that for actions where
system_list.length == 1, include system name in action table.  Your call.


Comment 3 Chip Turner 2002-04-03 21:18:48 UTC
Bret, this is your code, so it's up to you whether to put system name in on the
special case or not.

Comment 4 James Manning 2002-04-03 21:38:20 UTC
the more I think about this RFE, the less I like the resultant code that would 
exist.  Since the typical cases are 1) new errata, install to lotsa systems or 
2) single-system free setup and neither of those benefit from this (#1 has 
multiple systems, #2 only has one system so the name would be redundant), I'm 
really talking myself out of this one.  Sorry guys.

Comment 5 daryl herzmann 2007-11-13 20:29:49 UTC
Hi,

Could this RFE be resurrected?  I fail to see the point of the Scheduled action
page now that there is 1 entry per machine per errata.  It is impossible to find
meaningful information otherwise.

daryl

Comment 6 Máirín Duffy 2007-12-10 15:40:37 UTC
reopening bug.

Comment 7 daryl herzmann 2008-01-09 16:28:17 UTC
Maybe the bug here is that task-o-matic creates 1 entry for each errata per each
machine.  Back in the old days, each errata would have 1 entry and thus you had
a fighting chance. :)

Currently, my Pending actions has 4,500 entries, making it impossible to use.

Comment 9 Amy Owens 2008-10-15 13:23:34 UTC
so now there is one action for a bunch of servers--this was done in sprint 8


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