maas-devel team mailing list archive

[Julian Edwards <julian.edwards@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 29 Sep 2014 15:14:37 Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> >  We might be able to address the hypothetical situation
> >
> > above by putting an expiry time on each power command, but for how long
> > should that be? That would need discussion and/or experimentation.
> 
> No, we just let the user manipulate the queue themselves. THEY can
> interpolate and tell us what they actually want if they want to skip
> some of the steps.

I'm still catching up with 2500+ emails, so this may be out of date, but:

Perhaps the best approach is to not have a queue in MAAS at all and then it 
becomes very, very simple.  The user can request an action.  They can cancel 
that action (at their own risk, as it will leave the power in an unknown 
state).  Simple is easy to understand, has no surprises, is easy to implement 
and a vastly easier API for users to write client-side code.

I'd argue that any queue management like this is probably better handled on 
the client side.  At that point, MAAS becomes a place that will reliably 
complete requested actions, unless the hardware itself is faulty.

(Skimming the branches that landed while I was away, I see that a single 
outstanding action has been implemented)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.