UI "tech preview" option?

I am working on a feature[1] that isn't part of the paid part of my work day (I call them my "evening projects"). The three pieces of this work are common to other areas: API via apipie, CLI via hammer, and UI via bastion. When I mentioned to @bkearney that I was afraid this work would not reach the point where it would be accepted as a mergeable pull-request because of my struggling to get the UI portion working perfectly, he suggested I just submit the API and CLI portions and let the UI work catch up later. This seems like a great idea and an approach I'll take. That does leave the question of how I'll get the UI work complete.

In the past (prior to katello being released as Satellite-6) there was some wiggle room in how complete code had to be in order to get merged. One only has to read through some of the long-running pull-request dialogs to see that the bar for getting features into the code by the devs or community is pretty high. I'm not advocating a return to those days by any means but I do wonder if there is a middle ground. We used to have a user setting called "Experimental UI" which is actually present in SAM-1.4 (a product release of katello before merge with foreman). Would adding something like this be acceptable?

The benefit of the experimental flag (and perhaps it could be more nuanced than just a single flag) would be that contributors to the UI could get their code in front of a wider audience for feedback from usage and collaboration by other devs. The downside is that there may still end up being UI contributions that never move forward to being fully accepted.

Another option would be for me to attempt to write this as a UI plugin. The benefit would be that I could iterate at my own pace. The downside would be that for others to either use it or contribute to it, they'd need to install the plugin. I've tried this in the past with my roles plugin and had zero traction which is why I am leaning towards something more accessible to users.

Thoughts or other ideas?

[1] The feature is a way to add and remove subscriptions in bulk from host collections. If you've ever had to undo an org-wide subscription auto-attach on a non-trivial set of content hosts, you'll understand why I started the work. In my case I had 300 VMs that were supposed to consume a VDC guest sub but instead used up 100 physical. This is not uncommon by users of Satellite.
https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/5323

··· -- @thomasmckay


“The leader must aim high, see big, judge widely, thus setting himself apart form the ordinary people who debate in narrow confines.” ~ Charles De Gaulle

“Leadership is about making others better as a result of your presence and making sure that impact lasts in your absence.” ~ Harvard Business School

Does this specific case add a new top level UI or a new tab to an existing
page? Or overhaul the majority of an existing page?

The answers to these will vary my response.

Eric

··· On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Tom McKay wrote:

I am working on a feature[1] that isn’t part of the paid part of my work
day (I call them my “evening projects”). The three pieces of this work are
common to other areas: API via apipie, CLI via hammer, and UI via bastion.
When I mentioned to @bkearney that I was afraid this work would not reach
the point where it would be accepted as a mergeable pull-request because of
my struggling to get the UI portion working perfectly, he suggested I just
submit the API and CLI portions and let the UI work catch up later. This
seems like a great idea and an approach I’ll take. That does leave the
question of how I’ll get the UI work complete.

In the past (prior to katello being released as Satellite-6) there was
some wiggle room in how complete code had to be in order to get merged. One
only has to read through some of the long-running pull-request dialogs to
see that the bar for getting features into the code by the devs or
community is pretty high. I’m not advocating a return to those days by any
means but I do wonder if there is a middle ground. We used to have a user
setting called “Experimental UI” which is actually present in SAM-1.4 (a
product release of katello before merge with foreman). Would adding
something like this be acceptable?

The benefit of the experimental flag (and perhaps it could be more nuanced
than just a single flag) would be that contributors to the UI could get
their code in front of a wider audience for feedback from usage and
collaboration by other devs. The downside is that there may still end up
being UI contributions that never move forward to being fully accepted.

Another option would be for me to attempt to write this as a UI plugin.
The benefit would be that I could iterate at my own pace. The downside
would be that for others to either use it or contribute to it, they’d need
to install the plugin. I’ve tried this in the past with my roles plugin and
had zero traction which is why I am leaning towards something more
accessible to users.

Thoughts or other ideas?

[1] The feature is a way to add and remove subscriptions in bulk from host
collections. If you’ve ever had to undo an org-wide subscription
auto-attach on a non-trivial set of content hosts, you’ll understand why I
started the work. In my case I had 300 VMs that were supposed to consume a
VDC guest sub but instead used up 100 physical. This is not uncommon by
users of Satellite.
https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/5323


@thomasmckay


“The leader must aim high, see big, judge widely, thus setting himself
apart form the ordinary people who debate in narrow confines.” ~ Charles De
Gaulle

“Leadership is about making others better as a result of your presence and
making sure that impact lasts in your absence.” ~ Harvard Business School


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/d/optout.


Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University

> Does this specific case add a new top level UI or a new tab to an existing
> page? Or overhaul the majority of an existing page?
>
> The answers to these will vary my response.
>
>
> Eric

In this case, it adds a new tab to an existing page.

··· ----- Original Message -----

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Tom McKay thomasmckay@redhat.com wrote:

I am working on a feature[1] that isn’t part of the paid part of my work
day (I call them my “evening projects”). The three pieces of this work are
common to other areas: API via apipie, CLI via hammer, and UI via bastion.
When I mentioned to @bkearney that I was afraid this work would not reach
the point where it would be accepted as a mergeable pull-request because of
my struggling to get the UI portion working perfectly, he suggested I just
submit the API and CLI portions and let the UI work catch up later. This
seems like a great idea and an approach I’ll take. That does leave the
question of how I’ll get the UI work complete.

In the past (prior to katello being released as Satellite-6) there was
some wiggle room in how complete code had to be in order to get merged. One
only has to read through some of the long-running pull-request dialogs to
see that the bar for getting features into the code by the devs or
community is pretty high. I’m not advocating a return to those days by any
means but I do wonder if there is a middle ground. We used to have a user
setting called “Experimental UI” which is actually present in SAM-1.4 (a
product release of katello before merge with foreman). Would adding
something like this be acceptable?

The benefit of the experimental flag (and perhaps it could be more nuanced
than just a single flag) would be that contributors to the UI could get
their code in front of a wider audience for feedback from usage and
collaboration by other devs. The downside is that there may still end up
being UI contributions that never move forward to being fully accepted.

Another option would be for me to attempt to write this as a UI plugin.
The benefit would be that I could iterate at my own pace. The downside
would be that for others to either use it or contribute to it, they’d need
to install the plugin. I’ve tried this in the past with my roles plugin and
had zero traction which is why I am leaning towards something more
accessible to users.

Thoughts or other ideas?

[1] The feature is a way to add and remove subscriptions in bulk from host
collections. If you’ve ever had to undo an org-wide subscription
auto-attach on a non-trivial set of content hosts, you’ll understand why I
started the work. In my case I had 300 VMs that were supposed to consume a
VDC guest sub but instead used up 100 physical. This is not uncommon by
users of Satellite.
https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/5323


@thomasmckay


“The leader must aim high, see big, judge widely, thus setting himself
apart form the ordinary people who debate in narrow confines.” ~ Charles De
Gaulle

“Leadership is about making others better as a result of your presence and
making sure that impact lasts in your absence.” ~ Harvard Business School


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/d/optout.


Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University


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/d/optout.