RHSTOR-6968: Disaster recovery UI for Kubevirt VM - managed application #1856
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: GowthamShanmugam The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
GowthamShanmugam
force-pushed
the
RHSTOR-6968
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b52301d to
963f3ca
Compare
|
GowthamShanmugam
force-pushed
the
RHSTOR-6968
branch
from
963f3ca to
064e1fd
Compare
GowthamShanmugam
changed the title
|
@GowthamShanmugam: This pull request references RHSTOR-6968 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
Signed-off-by: Gowtham Shanmugasundaram <[email protected]>
GowthamShanmugam
force-pushed
the
RHSTOR-6968
branch
from
064e1fd to
aec7705
Compare
|
@GowthamShanmugam: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
|
||
| const getGVK = (resource: K8sResourceCommon) => | ||
| resource?.['apigroup'] | ||
| ? // ACM search API compatibile fields |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ? // ACM search API compatibile fields | |
| ? // ACM search API compatible fields |
| export const VirtualMachineModel: K8sModel = { | ||
| label: 'VirtualMachine', | ||
| labelPlural: 'VirtualMachines', | ||
| apiVersion: 'v1', | ||
| apiGroup: 'kubevirt.io', | ||
| plural: 'virtualmachines', | ||
| abbr: 'VM', | ||
| namespaced: true, | ||
| kind: 'VirtualMachine', | ||
| crd: true, | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is VM a new CRD, but in ACM it's represented as either AppSet or Subscription ??
| isOpen: boolean; | ||
| close?: () => void; | ||
| close: () => void; | ||
| // ACM search API compatibile field |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // ACM search API compatibile field | |
| // ACM search API compatible field |
| }); | ||
| return [...acc, ...filteredLabels]; | ||
| }, []) || []; | ||
| searchResult?.data.searchResult?.[0]?.related?.[0]?.items?.reduce( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this related change backward compatible with older version of ACM (as per our support matrix) ??
Meaning, say ODF 4.19 is running on older ACM version which is supported as per our support matrix, but that ACM version do not add/support related to the resultant object.
|
@GowthamShanmugam: This pull request references RHSTOR-6968 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
| [] | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| const applicaiton = applicationInfo as ApplicationType; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| const applicaiton = applicationInfo as ApplicationType; | |
| const application = applicationInfo as ApplicationType; |
| if (state.modalViewContext === ModalViewContext.ASSIGN_POLICY_VIEW) { | ||
| return ( | ||
| <AssignPolicyView | ||
| applicaitonInfo={applicaiton} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| applicaitonInfo={applicaiton} | |
| applicationInfo={application} |
| isSubscriptionAppType={ | ||
| applicaiton?.type === DRApplication.SUBSCRIPTION | ||
| } | ||
| unProtectedPlacementCount={applicaiton?.placements?.length} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| unProtectedPlacementCount={applicaiton?.placements?.length} | |
| unprotectedPlacementCount={application?.placements?.length} |
| import { ModalViewContext } from './utils/reducer'; | ||
|
|
||
| const getGVK = (resource: K8sResourceCommon) => | ||
| resource?.['apigroup'] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure what you are trying to do here. K8sResourceCommon does not have a apiGroup field. And are you using object notation to skip ts checks?
| const getGVK = (resource: K8sResourceCommon) => | ||
| resource?.['apigroup'] | ||
| ? // ACM search API compatibile fields | ||
| referenceFor(resource['apigroup'])(resource['apiversion'])(resource.kind) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The usage of this is wrong if the input object is of type K8sResourceCommon. referenceFor will give you a GVK literal with a /.
| /> | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
| // TODO: Add support for discovered application type |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is to be addressed in a follow-up PR, right?
ACM custom extension: stolostron/console#4252
Existing Flow:
The parser always triggers the modal, even while the watcher is fetching data, displaying it with a loading: false argument.
Problem in existing flow for VM: (Delay in modal loading)
The application parser is determined only after the VM parser identifies the appropriate parser to call. This causes a delay in modal loading, making the modal appear a few seconds after the user clicks the button.
New Flow:
The modal will always load, while the modal body will be rendered based on the parsers.