[Toaster] toaster: review request for build dash board page

[Barros Pena, Belen]

Hi Farrell,

Thanks for this. I have a few comments, but I think they should be all
easy to fix. There they go:

* The breadcrumb should not have the last Dashboard item. It is
represented by the build target + machine + completed on time stamp, which
should be the final, not clickable element of the breadcrumb

* If a build has multiple targets, the breadcrumb should only show the
first one (in alphabetical order). For example, I have a build that has 2
targets: core-image-base and core-image-minimal. The breadcrumb for this
build should say: "core-image-base (+1)" but it says "core-image-minimal
(+1)" instead.

* The same with the left navigation, in the Images section targets should
be listed in ascending alphabetical order. For the same build as above, I
have again core-image-minimal displaying above core-image-base. It should
be the other way around.

* The same with the order in the h1.

* Also, the in the h1 target names should be separated by commands.

* The build status notification should say "Completed on" or "Failed on"
before the time stamp. It should only say 'with' if there are errors or
warnings.

* If there are errors and warnings the build status notification should
say 'with # errors and # warnings'. Also, remove the .span2 class from the
<span> tags that contain the number of errors and warnings. That way
things look a bit more like a sentence.

* The link to the build time page is not working. The URL is set to
/build/build-time/ so it is missing the build id:
/build/<build_id>/build-time

* The image content module should only exist for those targets that are
image recipes (things like core-image-minimal). Right now it is also
showing for recipes (things like bash or busybox). When you have more than
one target that is an image recipe within a build, the image modules
should also be sorted in alphabetical order, so they match the navigation
and the page heading.

* The URL of the number of packages installed is not correct. It is set to
/build/image-information-packages.html but it should be set to
/build/<build_id>/target/<target_id>

* The label "License manifest² should be a link to the 'Packages included'
tab in the corresponding '1.1 Image information' page, showing the
following columns: Package, Package version, License and Recipe (i.e. the
information provided by the package manifest file).

* In the Configuration information, the layers should be listed in
alphabetical order

* In the Tasks information, instead of 'Tasks prebuilt' it should say
'Tasks not executed'

* In the Tasks information we are missing the Failed tasks (if there are
any). We are also missing the links:

** The number of tasks is a link to the tasks table
** The number of executed tasks is a link to the tasks table with the
'Executed tasks' filter applied
** The number of not executed tasks is a link to the tasks table with the
³Not executed tasks² filter applied

* In the Recipes and Packages information, the recipes item should say
'Recipes built'. We are also missing the links:

** The number of recipes should be a link to the recipes table
** The number of packages should be a link to the packages built table

* I am not able to collapse the errors module

* I am not able to expand the warnings module

* If a build throws no warnings, the warnings module should not display
(right now it shows with heading '0 warnings').

If you have any questions, let me know.

Cheers

Belén



On 05/03/2014 18:24, "Wymore, Farrell" <Farrell.Wymore at windriver.com>
wrote:

>Dear Belen,
> 
>I have pushed my first request for the build dash board page.
>I have tested for multiple build targets and targets that are
>not images. 
> 
>I¹ve applied Alex¹s patch for the database changes and
>manually included Amit¹s error and warning  code.
> 
>    fwymore/build-dashboard
> 
>The exceptions for this review are:
>· Waiting for license manifest decision
>· Waiting for image file table population from Alex
>· Issue around cached packages installed list
>We plan to review these in tomorrow¹s call.
> 
>Thanks ­ Farrell
> 
>