Community
Participate
Working Groups
As the user checks/unchecks items in the update/install wizard, it's possible that the provisioning plan will become invalid. Bug #208423 addresses having a better explanation of what is wrong. But the other issue is whether the UI can help correct. For example, UM has a "Select Required" button in the search results that will compute missing dependencies and add them to the list of what you want to install. Do we want to do something like this? (it would be "Add Required" vs. "Select Required" since the dependencies might not even be in the wizard.)
To do this we need status codes that classify provisioning problems and a way to figure out the correction. Such as, a code indicating something is missing and a way to figure out what the missing thing is.
If I'm not mistaken, you actually get this "for free" today. The planner consults all available repositories to attempt to resolve the dependencies of the thing being installed. In p2, "missing dependency" at the planner/director level really means, "We've looked everywhere and can't find what you need". The recourse at this point for the user is to add more sites. However, I agree there should be a code and message from the planner with more details here.
For completeness, the status returned should contain the repos that have been consulted since it is not always guaranteed that we will have looked at all repos now that we pass in a ProvisioningContext.
That would be nice. There's no indication (that I could find) in the current UM UI of where it's looking for updates, except that you'll get connection failure dialogs for failed repos. I'm not even sure that it checks all the repos you've specified in a previous Find/Install.
During M6 we should look at the most common failure cases and how the UI could help correct. There may be just a few that would really help. For example, in the missing dependency case: - check all repos (if we didn't already) - fast path to the add repo dialog If an upgrade of an existing component might fix the problem, offer to upgrade it, etc....
Another thing we could do is let the user try the operation anyway. That is, pass the operands to the engine even if the status is not OK. This could be dangerous, but if the status codes evolve so that we know more about why the plan is not OK, we could allow it in some cases.
from bug #204242 against the old update manager: One suggestion was to search for the missing plug-in. If we have a set of known sites that are not yet connected (via the associate sites and DISCOVERED sites mechanism) we could check those.
*** Bug 204242 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Renaming bug to reflect the current issue. Bug #218055 covers the provisioning plan side of things - better structure to report many issues, including missing IU's. This bug covers the UI side - ways to fast path the user to search in more repos, etc. in the specific case where content cannot be found.
*** Bug 287934 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
will be investigating resolution/explanation improvements in 3.6M4
Closing this bug. We have more specific bugs that cover the use cases in question. (bug 261928 and bug 267464).
