Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point #763

putmanoj · 2025-04-01T12:08:17Z

This PR has changes to Service Reconfigure action, will following changes made.

adds /Service/Generic/StateMachines/GenericLifecycle/reconfigure entry point
modifies particularly, PreProcess method, to pass dialog params (changes from user), for reconfiguration process
adds /Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils/util_object class, with common methods for service, service_action & update_task, to use in all the steps methods.
- The main reason for adding the 'UtilObject' class is 'Reconfigure' action does not have 'service' & 'service_action' attributes, unlike in case of 'Provision' or 'Retirement' actions
- task name attribute is different for each of the actions.
- the methods are common methods used across the steps methods

Resolves https://jsw.ibm.com/browse/CP4AIOPS-5515

Fryguy · 2025-04-01T16:53:22Z

@putmanoj I assume this is mostly copied from another entrypoint, but which one (or is this all brand new)? I just wanted to see them side-by-side so I can understand what I'm looking at.

putmanoj · 2025-04-02T04:14:00Z

@putmanoj I assume this is mostly copied from another entrypoint, but which one (or is this all brand new)? I just wanted to see them side-by-side so I can understand what I'm looking at.

Hi @Fryguy
I will add all the PRs in the channel.
Also, updated the description, for better understanding.

Acutally, probably methods can be removed, we could use default methods, if ...

'ReconfigureStart' (method) : if we find a way to set 'service_action' ae attribute in ManageIQ core for reconfigure task - needs more time to debug, to find out how to set.
'ReconfigurePreProcess' (method) - if we changes merge to default PreProcess, as I feel this is not a big change - https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-content/pull/763/files#diff-7be84ec5751a81c8a14c2ee722a8efbfc5290f017087c4fb5e9d6a67fa11d2c0R72-R83

…_action, etc Use common method all all methods, needed to make Reconfigure work,

agrare · 2025-04-08T13:42:20Z

...mate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/GenericLifecycle.class/__methods__/preprocess.rb

+              def reconfiguration_options
+                task = @handle.root["service_reconfigure_task"]
+                {:dialog => task.options[:dialog] || {}}
+              end
+
+              def update_options
+                if service_action == 'Reconfigure'
+                  reconfiguration_options
+                else
+                  {}


Note to self: something about this doesn't seem right in the generic lifecycle preprocess, needs investigation (is there a reconfigure override we can stick this in?)

Yes, agree, needs investigation, though for now, did not find anything better than this.

agrare · 2025-04-08T13:45:34Z

content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils.class/__methods__/util_object.rb

+              def self.update_task(message, status = nil, handle = $evm)
+                task_name = if handle.root["request"] == "service_reconfigure"
+                              'service_reconfigure_task'
+                            else
+                              'service_template_provision_task'
+                            end
+                handle.root[task_name].try do |task|
+                  task.miq_request.user_message = message
+                  task.message = status unless status.nil?
+                end
+              end
+
+              def self.service(handle = $evm)
+                if handle.root["request"] == "service_reconfigure"
+                  task = handle.root["service_reconfigure_task"]
+                  service = task.source unless task.nil?
+                else
+                  service = handle.root["service"]
+                end


Having this kind of "is it provision or is it reconfigure" logic in a generic utils object also doesn't feel right

Created the utils object (probably could have named it 'common' object), was to hide this "is it provision or is it reconfigure" logic, from the step methods.

At present,

service method - need not have the "is it provision or is it reconfigure" logic, as the 'service' object gets added with https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/23405/files#diff-7bcaccf0a5393207d24e32b17c0758232ab7f73c9ae41412c4b25e16b06f5eeaR39 change

service_action method - needs the "is it provision or is it reconfigure" logic, as did not yet find the way to add the 'service_action' attribute.

update_task method - needs the "is it provision or is it reconfigure" logic, as simply the task names are named differently, for Provision vs Reconfigure vs Retirement.

Also, would say there is bug in existing update_task method for Retirement, see https://github.com/putmanoj/manageiq-content/blob/master/content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/GenericLifecycle.class/__methods__/execute.rb#L34

def update_task(message) @handle.root['service_template_provision_task'].try { |task| task.miq_request.user_message = message } end

though for Retirement the task_name is 'service_retire_task'

For Provision

For Reconfigure

For Retirement

I'm not too familiar with Automate, but I still feel like a lot of this if reconfigure else if retirement else could be replaced by attributes on the class that we could use instead

agrare · 2025-04-14T19:22:18Z

content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils.class/__methods__/util_object.rb

+                if handle.root["request"] == "service_reconfigure"
+                  task = handle.root["service_reconfigure_task"]


If we set the service here could we drop this conditional? Seems weird that we have service for prov and retire but not reconfigure

agrare · 2025-04-14T19:23:03Z

content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils.class/__methods__/util_object.rb

+                            when "service_retire"
+                              "service_retire_task"
+                            else
+                              "service_template_provision_task"


What is handle.root["request"] here? Is it service_template_provision? If so could we generically do #{handle.root["request"]}_task}?

You'll notice I'm trying to kill this whole util_object if we can get away with it :)

Check images attached in #763 (comment)

Provision

request => "clone_to_service"

service_action => "Provision"

Reconfigure

request => "service_reconfigure"

service_action => (NOT AVAILABLE) - this is the main reason, need to add the util_object, unless we can fix this in core

Retirement

request => "service_retire"

service_action => "Retirement"

Apart from the task name, where patterns are different, between the actions

agrare · 2025-04-14T19:23:48Z

content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils.class/__methods__/util_object.rb

+                            end
+                handle.root[task_name].try do |task|
+                  task.miq_request.user_message = message
+                  task.message = status unless status.nil?


Really minor but we tend to prefer the "positive" if status over the "negative" unless status.nil?

…pecs

miq-bot · 2025-04-21T05:30:36Z

Checked commits putmanoj/manageiq-content@746e93a~...ca8c626 with ruby 3.1.5, rubocop 1.56.3, haml-lint 0.62.0, and yamllint
20 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. 👍

agrare · 2025-04-21T16:59:48Z

content/automate/ManageIQ/Service/Generic/StateMachines/Utils.class/__methods__/util_object.rb

+              def self.service(handle = $evm)
+                service = handle.root["service"] || service_task(handle)&.source
+                service.tap do |s|
+                  ManageIQ::Automate::System::CommonMethods::Utils::LogObject.log_and_raise("Service not found", handle) if s.nil?
+                end
+              end


@putmanoj with ManageIQ/manageiq#23405 merged do we still need this ?

Fryguy self-assigned this Apr 1, 2025

Fryguy added the enhancement label Apr 1, 2025

agrare self-requested a review April 1, 2025 17:17

Fryguy assigned agrare Apr 1, 2025

putmanoj changed the title ~~[WIP] Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point~~ Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point Apr 2, 2025

putmanoj force-pushed the support_service_reconfiguration_v4 branch from 81cafe4 to f25cf2e Compare April 4, 2025 11:55

putmanoj added 3 commits April 6, 2025 03:38

Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point

746e93a

add Util::UtilObject with common updated methods for service, service…

24a7076

…_action, etc Use common method all all methods, needed to make Reconfigure work,

Rename reconfigure entry point & remove separate reconfigure methods

caba3b8

putmanoj force-pushed the support_service_reconfiguration_v4 branch from f25cf2e to caba3b8 Compare April 6, 2025 19:40

putmanoj mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2025

Support reconfigure action for ServiceTerraformTemplate ManageIQ/manageiq-providers-embedded_terraform#94

Merged

agrare reviewed Apr 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

fix task name for service_retire

2624fd7

agrare reviewed Apr 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

putmanoj added 5 commits April 16, 2025 13:49

Fix specs - update error msg in util_object & import util_object in s…

98241a8

…pecs

add specs for UtilsObject .service_action, .service & .update_task

80bd62c

simplify Service Generic UtilObject, use hash instead of case/when

862bdec

Add specs for UtilIObect.service_task & simplify by using common context

86fba27

update code comments & add spec

ca8c626

agrare reviewed Apr 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

agrare merged commit a2b65fc into ManageIQ:master Apr 21, 2025
4 of 5 checks passed

		if handle.root["request"] == "service_reconfigure"
		task = handle.root["service_reconfigure_task"]

Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point #763

Add Generic Service Reconfigure entry point #763

Uh oh!

Conversation

putmanoj commented Apr 1, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Fryguy commented Apr 1, 2025

Uh oh!

putmanoj commented Apr 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

putmanoj Apr 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

miq-bot commented Apr 21, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

putmanoj commented Apr 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading

putmanoj commented Apr 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

putmanoj Apr 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading