Add delete binding action to provisioned services #1705

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T03:48:16Z

This is my unbind-service branch w/spadgett's Update delete binding from service-instance-row to use app names cherry-pick.
Rebased to eliminate the cherry-pick commit

I may close the previous unbind-service PR & keep this on to avoid the need to fiddle around with merge conflicts again.

Prev #1505

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T03:52:03Z

From a service instance, bindings to apps list kind & app name, otherwise if a secret lists the binding name:

Bindings from apps list the binding name:

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T03:53:42Z

@jwforres @spadgett pretty sure I'll close the other one & squash this, just thinking on it a bit.

spadgett

@benjaminapetersen Not sure if you were ready for review, but wanted to get you feedback since DCUT looms menacingly... :)

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:21:03Z

app/scripts/services/serviceInstances.js

+angular.module('openshiftConsole')
+ .factory('ServiceInstancesService', function() {
+ return {
+ // NOTE: should this be a filter? or will shared functionality grow here? 


I think this should be a filter. Maybe more than one: serviceClassDisplayName and serviceInstanceDisplayName?

Agree. This will become serviceInstanceDisplayName.

For a serviceClassDisplayName filter, are you thinking we need it because the externalMetadata field is a different than the typical metadata.name?

Moved the function to a filter, left a comment for a TODO on serviceClassDisplayName per my previous comment.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:23:39Z

app/scripts/services/bindingModalUtils.js

+'use strict';
+
+angular.module('openshiftConsole')
+ .factory('BindingModalUtils', [


Instead of making it specific to the binding modal, this could be a general utility that combines and (optionally?) sorts collections of API objects.

We have this need for config maps and secrets in some places where we combine them in a select.

Is this only used in the bind modal and no longer needed for unbind? I suggest for now we leave the working bind code alone if we're not reusing it for unbind.

Yeah, probably a premature refactor on my part, assuming I would need it for unbind. I will return this to its previous state.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:26:50Z

app/scripts/services/bindingModalUtils.js

+ var apiObjects = deploymentConfigs.concat(deployments)
+ .concat(replicationControllers)
+ .concat(replicaSets)
+ .concat(statefulSets);


Probably want to check if these are arrays before calling concat. Or at least make a comment that the inputs must be arrays.

agree, I'll start with [].concat(deploymentConfigs) to ensure we don't error here (after moving it back to bindService).

I think it's more than this... If you pass an object as an argument to concat, does it just append the object?

Maybe a moot point if you're rolling back the retractor though

Yeah... everything below has a _.toArray wrap (original code before my change). If we do move it out in future, agree, perhaps the _.toArray should come with it & happen internally.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:27:38Z

app/scripts/directives/bindService.js

- .concat(replicaSets)
- .concat(statefulSets);
- ctrl.applications = _.sortByAll(apiObjects, ['metadata.name', 'kind']);
- ctrl.bindType = ctrl.applications.length ? "application" : "secret-only";


You are no longer setting ctrl.bindType

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:29:12Z

app/scripts/directives/bindService.js

@@ -55,20 +59,6 @@
 }
 };

-
- var deploymentConfigs, deployments, replicationControllers, replicaSets, statefulSets;
- var sortApplications = function() {


Suggest leaving sortApplications as a function then calling your new service function from here so you don't have to repeat the parameters in every list callback.

var sortApplication = function() { ctrl.applications = BindingModalUtils.sortApplications(deploymentConfigs, deployments, replicationControllers, replicaSets, statefulSets); ctrl.bindType = _.isEmpty(ctrl.applications) ? "secret-only" : "application"; };

I moved it back to bindService as it originally was. Def think this is a good call if we end up sharing it in the future.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:30:51Z

app/scripts/directives/unbindService.js

+ // var deploymentConfigs, deployments, replicationControllers, replicaSets, statefulSets;
+
+
+ // TODO: once we have podPreset we will be able to associate the


Remove the TODO comments?

Eliminated this whole section, don't think any of it will ever be needed w/the maps from overview.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:33:54Z

app/scripts/directives/unbindService.js

+ bindings: {
+ target: '<',
+ bindings: '<',
+ applications: '<',


bindings and applications are maps. Looking at just the names, I thought these were flat lists. Can we use similar names to what we use on the overview so it's clear they are the same maps?

bindingsByInstanceRef && applicationsByBinding, will do... something like:

<unbind-service target="row.overlay.state.target" bindings-by-instance="row.bindings" applications-by-binding="row.state.applicationsByBinding" on-close="row.closeOverlayPanel"></unbind-service>

is a little wordy, but agree the clarity is probably better.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:35:17Z

app/scripts/directives/unbindService.js

+ };
+
+ ctrl.appNameForBinding = function(bindingName) {
+ return _.get(_.first(_.get(ctrl.applications, bindingName)), ['metadata', 'name']) || bindingName;


I find the nested lodash calls on one line here and just below hard to follow.

It looks like we're showing just the first app name? Usually there is only one app, but if unbind is going to affect multiple apps, it's important to know.

Updating to this:

@ncameronbritt for input if this deviates or is new. In theory, if a binding represents multiple apps, this is a bit wasteful of space as they could be listed horizontally, but I don't know of another pattern off the top of my head so going with consistency for now. We can iterate if needed.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T11:42:22Z

app/views/overview/_list-row-actions.html

@@ -28,6 +28,9 @@
 <li ng-if="('pod_presets' | enableTechPreviewFeature) && row.state.bindableServiceInstances.length" role="menuitem">
 <a href="" ng-click="row.showOverlayPanel('bindService', {target: row.apiObject})">Create Binding</a>
 </li>
+ <li ng-if="('pod_presets' | enableTechPreviewFeature) && row.state.bindableServiceInstances.length" role="menuitem">


Maybe use ng-if-start on the li above and ng-if-end since the conditions are the same?

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T13:29:56Z

@spadgett yup! bring on the reviews. Not exactly ready like I'd like to be, but time is of the essence. I'll hit these items while I work on cleanup.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T17:43:19Z

For the radio buttons, wonder if it should be

{{name}} <small class="text-muted">&ndash; {{kind}}</small>`

like in the bind application dropdown?

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T17:44:05Z

@spadgett @jwforres finished round 1 of requested changes. I'm looking it over again myself, but feel free to give it another pass. Def prefer a goal of pre 3pm to get it in the queue :)

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T17:46:25Z

@spadgett yeah good Q. We have all of these:

I like your suggestion, I think it would improve density / clarity.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T17:50:34Z

app/views/directives/bind-service/remove-binding-confirm.html

+<div>
+ <div ng-if="!ctrl.error">
+ <h3 class="mar-top-none">
+ Binding for {{ctrl.appKindForBinding(ctrl.selectedBinding) | humanizeKind : true}} <strong>{{ctrl.appNameForBinding(ctrl.selectedBinding)}}</strong> has been deleted.


Looks like you're still calling a method you removed, appNameForBinding?

Fixing that now, working on listing here as well.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T17:53:12Z

On the last binding dialog, we show the binding name, but we don't show the name anywhere on the overview currently, so I'm not going to know which to delete.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T17:56:56Z

I think the first wizard step label should either be "Services" or "Applications" depending on what we're showing to be consistent with the Create Binding dialog.

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T18:05:27Z

Density here definitely improves clarity:

spadgett · 2017-06-14T18:14:48Z

app/views/directives/bind-service/select-binding.html

+ <div class="component-label">
+ Secret
+ </div>
+ <p>{{appForBinding.metadata.name || binding.metadata.name}}</p>


Should this be...

<p>{{binding.spec.secretName}}</p>

Yup will do

spadgett · 2017-06-14T18:17:51Z

Need to disable the Delete button when nothing is selected or preselect the first item. I think preselecting the first is OK? @ncameronbritt @jwforres

ncameronbritt · 2017-06-14T18:21:33Z

I think preselecting if there is only one makes sense. I think if there is more than one we wouldn't preselect, and the "Delete" button would be disabled. I believe that is consistent with the Bind flow.

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T18:24:59Z

Updating confirmation to list apps & match first step in panel:

Thoughts? (I see I have more comments to loop back on, have not addressed yet)

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T18:30:40Z

@spadgett @ncameronbritt if first should be "Applications" or "Services", should last step also be "Results"? The word "Confirmation" implies to me I would have one more changes to back out of the action.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T18:31:03Z

Yes, should be "Results". I believe that's what we use everywhere else.

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T18:37:05Z

@spadgett @ncameronbritt working on the pre-select / disable now. I think that requires this validityWatcher like bind service. FWIW, I'd like to look at updating pf-wizard to support this is a more standard way, its a little kludgy, may open an issue since validation is pretty common.

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T19:53:01Z

app/index.html

@@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ <h2 class="text-center" id="temporary-loading-message" style="display: none;">Lo
 <script src="scripts/directives/buildStatus.js"></script>
 <script src="scripts/directives/routeServiceBarChart.js"></script>
 <script src="scripts/directives/bindService.js"></script>
+ <script src="scripts/directives/unbindService.js"></script>


I prob should rename this file since we no longer call it "unbind"

spadgett · 2017-06-14T19:56:37Z

app/views/overview/_list-row.html

+ <div ng-if="row.overlay.panelName === 'unbindService'">
+ <unbind-service
+ target="row.overlay.state.target"
+ bindings-by-instance="row.bindings"


Ah, so it's not a map. I'd call the attribute bindings if it's just the array of bindings. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Ok, here will be:

<unbind-service target="row.overlay.state.target" binding="row.bindings" on-close="row.closeOverlayPanel"></unbind-service>

and in the service instance row template:

<unbind-service target="row.overlay.state.target" bindings="row.bindings" applications-by-binding="row.state.applicationsByBinding" on-close="row.closeOverlayPanel"></unbind-service>

So we will have bindings and applicationsByBinding.

spadgett · 2017-06-14T19:59:43Z

app/views/directives/bind-service/delete-binding-result.html

+ {{appForBinding.metadata.name}} <small class="text-muted">&ndash; {{ appForBinding.kind | humanizeKind : true}}</small>
+ </div>
+ <div ng-if="!(ctrl.appsForBinding(ctrl.selectedBinding))">
+ {{ctrl.selectedBinding}} <small class="text-muted">&ndash; Secret</small>


This is always the binding name here and not a secret correct?

I think you can put Binding here for now and we can circle back. I have some concerns that we don't show the binding name anywhere in the UI, but we can fix as a follow on to get the basic functionality in.

I'll swap this & leave a TODO: because its weird to select "secret" then see "binding" deleted, agree. :/

- Update delete binding from service-instance-row to use app names - Add unbind service to list-row - Update unbindService to support multiple apps per binding & display app names - Add serviceInstanceDisplayName filter

spadgett · 2017-06-14T20:28:07Z

Thanks for the fast turnaround @benjaminapetersen

[merge]

openshift-bot · 2017-06-14T20:31:20Z

Evaluated for origin web console merge up to f3a3f5b

openshift-bot · 2017-06-14T20:56:33Z

Origin Web Console Merge Results: SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_requests_origin_web_console/1536/) (Base Commit: b93ac53)

benjaminapetersen · 2017-06-14T23:56:00Z

woohoo! 😋

spadgett requested changes Jun 14, 2017

View reviewed changes

benjaminapetersen force-pushed the unbind-service-with-spadgett-binding-list branch from 3516a5a to 780b597 Compare June 14, 2017 17:42

spadgett reviewed Jun 14, 2017

View reviewed changes

benjaminapetersen mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2017

Validation for pf-wizard is a bit kludgy #1707

Closed

benjaminapetersen force-pushed the unbind-service-with-spadgett-binding-list branch from 780b597 to 4e3ef43 Compare June 14, 2017 19:47

benjaminapetersen mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2017

Auto select a single binding in the delete binding flow #1709

Closed

spadgett changed the title ~~Unbind service (with spadgett binding list)~~ Add unbind action to provisioned services Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen changed the title ~~Add unbind action to provisioned services~~ Add delete binding action to provisioned services Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

View reviewed changes

spadgett reviewed Jun 14, 2017

View reviewed changes

benjaminapetersen force-pushed the unbind-service-with-spadgett-binding-list branch from 4e3ef43 to f3a3f5b Compare June 14, 2017 20:17

Add unbind action to provisioned services

f3a3f5b

- Update delete binding from service-instance-row to use app names - Add unbind service to list-row - Update unbindService to support multiple apps per binding & display app names - Add serviceInstanceDisplayName filter

benjaminapetersen mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2017

Deleting a binding for a secret does a flip-flop on the results step #1710

Closed

spadgett approved these changes Jun 14, 2017

View reviewed changes

openshift-bot merged commit f55bd6b into openshift:master Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen deleted the unbind-service-with-spadgett-binding-list branch June 14, 2017 23:53

benjaminapetersen mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2017

Add delete binding (unbind) action to provisioned services #1505

Closed

2 tasks

		// var deploymentConfigs, deployments, replicationControllers, replicaSets, statefulSets;


		// TODO: once we have podPreset we will be able to associate the

Add delete binding action to provisioned services #1705

Add delete binding action to provisioned services #1705

Conversation

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017 • edited by spadgett Loading

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

spadgett left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

benjaminapetersen Jun 14, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

benjaminapetersen Jun 14, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017 • edited Loading

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017

ncameronbritt commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017

openshift-bot commented Jun 14, 2017

openshift-bot commented Jun 14, 2017 • edited Loading

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017

benjaminapetersen commented Jun 14, 2017 •

edited by spadgett

Loading

benjaminapetersen Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

benjaminapetersen Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

spadgett commented Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading

openshift-bot commented Jun 14, 2017 •

edited

Loading