<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#333333">
Hey Ju,<br>
<br>
thanks for your feedback, I don't think there is anything to hide
and I would love to have everything discussed in open way. I hope
you don't mind me cc-ing the answer to upstream list.<br>
<br>
Furthermore what I need to stress is:<br>
* Purpose of these wireframes was to start discussion around
underlying concepts<br>
* It is very first draft of wireframes, where the work is in
progress and is not finished, I want to get feedback from the
community before handing out next versions. I believe it's broadly
understood.<br>
* I was not focusing much on big details, more on what user can see
on the screen in which step<br>
* So yes, it needs to be polished, but I am very happy to gather all
notes from anybody about some missing details so I can reflect them<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2013/04/10 22:32, Ju Lim wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Jarda:</p>
<p class="p1">I'm putting my comments / feedback here in
internal email and not upstream as there are so many comments
including comments related to general UX best practices that
should have been in the design but are not in there right now.
I'll explain more my reasons when we talk on Monday / next
week.</p>
<p class="p1">In the meantime, here are my comments/feedback for
the Logical Group and Resource Class creation wireframes:</p>
<p class="p3"><span class="s2"></span></p>
<p class="p1"><b>Logical Group Creation</b></p>
<p class="p2"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"
data-mce-style="font-size: 12pt;">Logical Group (aka Rack)
Creation: </span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://people.redhat.com/%7Ejcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_l-group_creation_wireframes.pdf"
style="font-size: 12pt;"
data-mce-href="http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_l-group_creation_wireframes.pdf"
data-mce-style="font-size: 12pt;">http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_l-group_creation_wireframes.pdf</a></p>
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 2:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) L-Group term is confusing. Why not just call
it out as Logical Group?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
L-Group term is working name and nobody agreed on it, it is just
something general, what I used for this purpose by shortening
'logical group'. But based on feedback until now, community really
like it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) Terminology inconsistency. Specifically, I'm
referring to the word Setup. I've also seen words used in
other places, such as Create, Add, Configure, Setup. In this
particular slide, the header/label reads "Create L-Group" but
Step 1 in the workflow says "L-Group Setup."</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I agree with being consistent. But I don't see the arguments with
Create, Add, Configure and Setup. Create is very different from
Setup. 'Setup' means configuring and 'Create' means creating the
object in database. The whole workflow is about creating the class.
In the first step, you do general setup. Can you please be more
specific in that inconsistency? Or what would you suggest?<br>
<br>
Furthermore, it's also very different Add and Create, add means add
something existing, by importing to the list, create means creating
objects.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) Should IP Subnet be an open text field?
Should we try to reduce erroneous typing by providing a
clearer text entry field.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Can you give an example? Because the best user experience by
operators is to have open field for that. You can find it in any
advanced network setup.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(4) We need to indicate which fields are
mandatory, e.g. IP Subnet, Management Node. Note: This
comment applies all the other pages / slides (so I don't have
to call out each item that is mandatory).</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes, I agree, I was not focusing on it yet.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(5) It should include a L-Group Name field for
entry as the first field where all the other fields are. I
didn't notice at all L-Group Name field until I got to the
next page/slide as the visuals (light grey) made it hard for
me to see it, and the inline editing while nice was not
consistent with the other fields to be entered. Would we
consider suggesting a default name if a user does not type a
label / display name, e.g. LogicalGroup01, LogicalGroup02,
etc.? Also, why do you need "…" at all?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Agree with regular label and text field, it's already fixed in newer
version, but I am still working on that so it's not sent yet.<br>
No default names, please, this doesn't make any sense and you can't
predict anything here.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(6) Order of the buttons at the bottom are
strange. I would think the Nodes Definition should be on the
left, and Back and Cancel be on the right, or perhaps
together.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I strongly disagree at this point. In any workflow the right side
means forward and left side means back.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(7) Why show a Back button if it's disabled?
Specifically, have we decided if a function / action is not
allowed whether to grey it out vs. hiding it in the UI?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Because of consistency of 'cancel' button position.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(8) Can user save this task if he/she gets
interrupted while he/she is trying to create the logical group
[Save button]?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Nope.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(9) Why does the "Add Node…" need a "…?"</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
The indication was there to show, that there is more options hidden
under the label. We can find better visualization for this.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(10) Choosing the Provisioning image does not
belong in the main section of Step It should be part of
adding/editing the Management Node. In current location, it's
breaking the user's mental model on the flow of setting up a
management node. I think you were trying to find something
that would allow the User to apply the image to multiple
management nodes. It can easily be addressed in the widget on
the right with maybe a checkbox next to the image selection of
"Use same image for all other management nodes in this logical
group" or something to that effect.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
It's not possible to choose various images to multiple Management
Nodes. User can select only one image for all nodes (if there are
more).<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(11) "Nodes Definition" button should be "Define
Nodes" - per UX best practices it should be a verb of what
you're going to do.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I disagree. There were various researches and some of them were
contradictory because it very depends on the context.<br>
<br>
If there is 'Define Nodes' on the button, user would think, that at
the moment when he clicks the button, he triggers some action, which
is not true, because he only goes to next step where he need to
define the nodes. Therefor I see more practical to have 'Nodes
Definition' instead of 'Define Nodes'.<br>
<br>
Very well you can see the point at provisioning step, if you label
the button 'Provision', when user hits the button, he expects that
provisioning will start - not true, he only goes to provisioning
setup page.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(12) I think the arrow labels should be either be
nouns or actions / verbs, e.g. Configure Logical Group,
Configure or Add Nodes, Provision</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Currently they are all nouns.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(13) Can you define what user is doing in
Provision? Should it be part of this flow? Reason I ask is
that maybe it's part of another user's function. That's one
point, and secondly the term "Provision" can mean different
things to different users within IT organizations / operators.
I'd like to make sure also that the term Provision used here
by the Infrastructure Admin is indeed what Provision means to
him/her.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Admin is experienced user and if he is in workflow where he deals
with hardware nodes, I would expect him to know, what provisioning
means.<br>
Provisioning is applying image to node, getting it ready for
operation.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(14) Should we consider a vertical navigate for
the workflow vs. horizon to show the 3-step process?
Specifically, if the top navigation bar is going to have 3-4
levels of navigation, this will potentially look a little
cluttered at the top and may make it complex to look at in the
UI. I might suggest trying a vertical 3 step on the left. I
think it might also be nice to consider some help text in the
UI to help explain to the User what each step is going to do
and what the purpose is. Here's are some other wizard
examples to consider:<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p3"><span class="s2">(1) <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/05/images/Fig1_mint_getstarted.png"
data-mce-href="http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/05/images/Fig1_mint_getstarted.png"><span
class="s1">http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/05/images/Fig1_mint_getstarted.png</span></a></span></p>
<p class="p3"><span class="s2">(2) <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/tuDMzLFTzzA/maxresdefault.jpg"
data-mce-href="http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/tuDMzLFTzzA/maxresdefault.jpg"><span
class="s1">http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/tuDMzLFTzzA/maxresdefault.jpg</span></a></span></p>
<p class="p3"><span class="s2">(3) <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://virtualswede.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/mylab_add_physcial_datastore_step2.png"
data-mce-href="http://virtualswede.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/mylab_add_physcial_datastore_step2.png"><span
class="s1">http://virtualswede.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/mylab_add_physcial_datastore_step2.png</span></a></span></p>
<p class="p3"><span class="s2">(4) <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.radiusbob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-4.png"
data-mce-href="http://www.radiusbob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-4.png"><span
class="s1">http://www.radiusbob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Picture-4.png</span></a></span></p>
<p class="p3"><span class="s2">(5) <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.serverwatch.com/imagesvr_ce/1522/win8server%20-%203.jpg"
data-mce-href="http://www.serverwatch.com/imagesvr_ce/1522/win8server%20-%203.jpg"><span
class="s1">http://www.serverwatch.com/imagesvr_ce/1522/win8server%20-%203.jpg</span></a></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
This is basic bootstrap approach and I don't expect to implement
something completely different at the moment.<br>
<br>
Furthermore, we should make sure, that it is visualized correctly
and that number of steps is regulated and appropriate. I don't see
problem with horizontal approach.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 5:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) Does one assume that "Name…" uses
inline-editing for typing in the name? If the checkbox says
"Use IP address as a name," why not show the IP address/subnet
in place of the "Name…: and have a little pencil
icon/indicator that it's editable? Additionally, shouldn't it
say (for the checkbox) "Use IP Subnet as the name" or did you
mean the Management IP address?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Name would be separate text field.<br>
Agree with the label, I will add 'Management' to be more clear.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) What unit is CPUs? It's not consistent with
Memory (MB) and Local Disk (GB) which includes unit being
used.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I need to add the unit there, missed it, thanks.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) Whenever a user is prompted to put in a
password, user should be asked to re-enter the password. This
is a common best practice for entering password information.
I'll assume this information is encrypted somehow.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
No he shouldn't. User is entering already existing password. It's
like asking re-enter password on e-mail login.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 8:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) How do you handle deleting a Management Node
if you fat fingered the entry?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes, that's good point. Already answered on Liz's feedback, I added
edit and delete icons.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 12:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) What is the "Choose from List" option?
There's no flow that covers what this radio button option
does. Is it a way for someone to import the nodes? Ideally,
if user is going to be manually adding nodes, they should have
the option to either Add Node manually or Add Nodes from an
external file.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
User already has the manual way - that's what we are doing at the
moment. The 'list' option is just indicator, that in the future, we
might have auto-discovery way. Not in the scope for now though.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) The "Create and go to Provisioning" button
needs to be be something consistent, be it Add Nodes and
Proceed to Provision or something that is clearer. We need to
be consistent with labeling and terminology.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Sure, we can make it clearer. But user is not adding nodes, he is
creating L-Group at that moment. But if the label is better
formulated, I'd be happy.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1"><b>Resource Class Creation</b></p>
<p class="p1">Resource Class Creation: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://people.redhat.com/%7Ejcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_resource_class_creation_wireframes.pdf"
style="font-size: 12pt;"
data-mce-href="http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_resource_class_creation_wireframes.pdf"
data-mce-style="font-size: 12pt;">http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tuskar/2013-09-30_tuskar_resource_class_creation_wireframes.pdf</a></p>
<div><br>
</div>
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 1:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) Change "Choose Type:" to "Specify Resource
Class Type" or something that clearly specifies what you're
asking of the user.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Agree, going to fix this.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) There needs to be a default if you're using
radio button. This is a UX best practice.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Answered in Liz's feedback.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) I won't repeat my comments from the Logical
Group creation flow as the same comments made previously
around mandatory fields, terminology, labeling applies here as
well.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
The same answers here.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 5:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) I was *surprised* to see Flavors Definition
and various entries to enter. For me, it felt like going from
something simple to something complex looking because of how
the fields showed up on the screen and they are laid out. To
make a wizard look easy, we should consider either putting all
the fields we are going to ask up front and not surprise the
user.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
It's already fixed in newer version.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) Where does one label the flavor? Shouldn't
user label the flavor as the first thing before specifying
what the other flavor attributes are? I came back to this
comment after reading a few pages / slides ahead. Basically
the mental model of the user flow is a little confusing the
way it is. Here's the flow I was thinking: (1) Ask user how
many flavors -- let them specify the flavor names or suggest
default ones (2) What is the capacity that I'm going to be
applying to these flavors. (3) Create/Generate flavors (4)
Modify flavors (5) Allow user to modify the overall limits/max
# with ability to recreate the flavors if needed as well as
add more flavors, delete an existing flavor, reset and clear
capabilities, etc.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
1) I am not very sure if user wants to put the number of flavors
first. It depends on the use case and we are not sure about the
workflow. My thinking is based on the fact, that I know what is the
biggest specification I want to provide and because it is halfing
resources, then I count, up to where I want to half my resource -
which is actually the number of flavors.<br>
<br>
But if there are multiple opinions that flavor count needs to go
first, I am fine with switching position of those two.<br>
<br>
We cannot suggest default names and furthermore user still doesn't
have possibility where to specify the names at this step, because he
has no flavors at that moment.<br>
<br>
4) We don't want to let user modify flavors if there is assisted
setup. We are guiding and helping user to achieve the best
performance. If you want to set it up manually, then switch off
assistant.<br>
<br>
5) This is not how it works, because max # of VMs is strictly bound
to hardware.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) We should avoid abbreviating "Root D.," "Eph.
D," and "Swap D." -- it may not be obvious to a new user.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Already fixed in newer version and update flavor definition
workflow.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(4) I think # of Flavors should come before the
Maximum Flavor size. I also believe some text to guide the
user to explain what's happening and why they are being asked
this information will help make it easier for user to
understand the flow.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Commented in (2), since this was mentioned there.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(5) Change "Generate" button to "Create Flavors"
or something more obvious what it is as my initial impression
of Generate was something else other than what the intention
was.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
User is not creating flavors at that step, so it doesn't make sense
to name the button 'Create Flavors'. It's generating list of flavors
for user, generating values, I don't see problem in that. If there
are multiple concerns, suggestions are welcome.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 9:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) I couldn't figure out what the paperclip like
icon to the right of each of the flavor attributes (vCPU, RAM,
etc.) meant.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
It's linking function and it won't be part of v1, we already
discussed it before. Anyway, it won't appear in next version of
wireframes.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 13:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) I feel the Hardware requirements entry field
the way it's shown should be changed to something more
readable and more easy to consume by a user. This pattern
does not seem to be consistent with any of the other data
entry patterns we used in the UI designs I've seen so far.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Will be simplified for v1 (because of implementation complexity),
there will be enough time to think this pattern through then.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) Change term "Property" to "Attribute" to be in
align with international ITIL standards, which are widely
adopted by customers today. Also the word "Sign" should be
"condition" and the word "condition" should be expression or
line. Terminology is confusing and not correct. In general,
this entry field should change as it's not a good way to do it
the way it is. I can show you offline other options.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
No problem with renaming the fields. I was not aware of ITIL
standards for this fields.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) Are we sure drop down listbox for Add image
will work? I don't think it is a scalable proposal. We
should consider supporting a search with type ahead in the
drop down listbox if we go down this path.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
We don't need anything extra scalable here. Anyway, I am changing
this pattern to be multiple-selection dropdown based on reviews and
feedbacks.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">Page / Slide 22:</p>
<p class="p1">(1) I'm not sure the current tree selection will
scale well if you have large number of logical groups in the
future. I think we need to rethink this one or consider other
design choices as well.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
There needs to happen some changes, because we came into various
details during discussions.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(2) It's not clear what vCPUn units are.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Number of vCPUs.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(3) It's not clear what Disk is. Can we clarify
what this is based on the resource type selected?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
It's normal physical disk storage of the hardware. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(4) I also think it would be ideal to show what
type of resource class it is in the widget on the right.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
OK, this is good idea.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(5) Hardware Assignment is a strange label. Why
isn't it Assign Nodes or Node Assignment (if we follow your
verbiage)?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes, it would be better to name it Nodes Assignment, I will reflect
that.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<p class="p1">(6) What is Provisioning step? See previous
reference in the Logical Group feedback.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Already answered in previous section.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1264942284.1112383.1380918721797.JavaMail.root@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">
<div>Let's discuss further offline.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Ju</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks<br>
-- Jarda<br>
</body>
</html>