Hammer host power actions UX

Development
1

Hello,
I started hesitating about UX just before finishing the commands for
powering hosts on/off. A simple quiz: What would you prefer?

A) separate sub-command for each action:
$ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status}

B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed):
$ hammer host power {–on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status}

Thanks for your opinions
Tomas

2

Personally I would go for A) with slightly changed: hammer host power_status, as there might be more statuses involved and might be confusing

– Ivan

··· ----- Original Message ----- > Hello, > I started hesitating about UX just before finishing the commands for > powering hosts on/off. A simple quiz: What would you prefer? > > A) separate sub-command for each action: > $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status} > > B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed): > $ hammer host power {--on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status} > > Thanks for your opinions > Tomas > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >
3

> A) separate sub-command for each action:
> $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status}
I like this one

> B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed):
> $ hammer host power {–on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status}
This looks a bit esoteric to me. Also I can imagine other options for these
"subcommands" in future
e.g. "hammer host power --off --force"

it would not be clear to what --force belongs in this example.

··· On Monday 11 of November 2013 10:35:41 Tomas Strachota wrote:

–
Marek

4

I also vote for this option, which is obviously harder to implement :slight_smile:

LZ

··· On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Tomas Strachota wrote: > A) separate sub-command for each action: > $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status}

–
Later,

Lukas “lzap” Zapletal
irc: lzap #theforeman

5

> Hello,
> I started hesitating about UX just before finishing the commands for
> powering hosts on/off. A simple quiz: What would you prefer?
>
> A) separate sub-command for each action:
> $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status}
I find option A more intuitive
>
> B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed):
> $ hammer host power {–on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status}
>
> Thanks for your opinions
> Tomas
>
Martin

··· On 11/11/2013 10:35 AM, Tomas Strachota wrote:
6

+1

David

··· ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marek Hulan" > To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 4:52:50 AM > Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Hammer host power actions UX > > On Monday 11 of November 2013 10:35:41 Tomas Strachota wrote: > > A) separate sub-command for each action: > > $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status} > I like this one > > > B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed): > > $ hammer host power {--on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status} > This looks a bit esoteric to me. Also I can imagine other options for these > "subcommands" in future > e.g. "hammer host power --off --force" > > it would not be clear to what --force belongs in this example. > > -- > Marek > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >
7

> > A) separate sub-command for each action:
> > $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status}
> I like this one
+1

> > B) one sub command, multiple options (only one at a time is allowed):
> > $ hammer host power {–on, --off, --reboot, --reset, --status}
> This looks a bit esoteric to me. Also I can imagine other options for these
> "subcommands" in future
> e.g. "hammer host power --off --force"
>
> it would not be clear to what --force belongs in this example.

Agreed.

··· On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:52:50AM +0100, Marek Hulan wrote: > On Monday 11 of November 2013 10:35:41 Tomas Strachota wrote:
8

OK, thanks for opinions, I'm going for A.

T.

··· On 11/12/2013 10:06 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:35:41AM +0100, Tomas Strachota wrote: >> A) separate sub-command for each action: >> $ hammer host {start, stop, reboot, reset, status} > > I also vote for this option, which is obviously harder to implement :-) > > LZ >
9

"Hammer host power status" would match almost word-for-word the commands
used with ipmitool (ipmitool -H myhost.com power status), and would
therefore be familiar to a lot of admins. Lets stick with that.

Greg