|Summary:||[OVS] [UI][RFE] - Add column to the 'Clusters' main tab that will indicate the cluster's switch type|
|Product:||[oVirt] ovirt-engine||Reporter:||Michael Burman <mburman>|
|Component:||BLL.Network||Assignee:||Martin Mucha <mmucha>|
|Status:||CLOSED WONTFIX||QA Contact:||Michael Burman <mburman>|
|Version:||4.0.0||CC:||bugs, danken, mmucha, myakove, ylavi|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||If docs needed, set a value|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2016-12-13 12:51:26 UTC||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||Network||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Michael Burman 2016-08-02 06:54:50 UTC
Description of problem: [OVS] [UI] - Add column to the 'Clusters' main tab that will indicate the cluster's switch type. Currently we have no indication and info about the cluster's switch type and if we adding the option to change this type, we should also display it in a column of it's own in the 'Cluster' main tab. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 126.96.36.199-0.1.el7ev
Comment 1 Dan Kenigsberg 2016-08-02 08:34:43 UTC
Why is it important to have the information in the table? It was meant to be tucked away as an internal cluster detail.
Comment 2 Red Hat Bugzilla Rules Engine 2016-08-02 08:34:46 UTC
Bug tickets must have version flags set prior to targeting them to a release. Please ask maintainer to set the correct version flags and only then set the target milestone.
Comment 3 Yaniv Lavi 2016-11-30 10:02:38 UTC
Can you please revert this change?
Comment 4 Michael Burman 2016-11-30 10:05:31 UTC
Why we reverting this?
Comment 5 Martin Mucha 2016-11-30 10:05:44 UTC
sure. May I ask for reason for such revert? (to know if there isn't simple fix existing) Or we just don't want to show this value in main table (it sounds useful to me though).
Comment 6 Yaniv Lavi 2016-11-30 13:45:55 UTC
(In reply to Martin Mucha from comment #5) > sure. May I ask for reason for such revert? (to know if there isn't simple > fix existing) Or we just don't want to show this value in main table (it > sounds useful to me though). We are suspending the OVS effort and this is very visible change.
Comment 7 Yaniv Lavi 2016-12-13 12:51:26 UTC
I see it's reverted. Closing as won't fix.