Code review comment for lp:~jtv/maas-test/bootresources-config

This is madness. We want to make people download gigabytes extra in the release version because we're arguing over a hundred lines of code we could save with a temporary solution with an unfriendly UI that is also doomed from the start? I'm not buying it.

I agree that just passing a bootresources.yaml would be easier (and take about half the code, not “10× less”) but that is not the desired user experience. The difference in code size really isn't that dramatic in absolute numbers, for a user-friendliness issue.

Also, it should be noted for the record that the branch did work properly in the experimental run, but because of it, revealed an outdated default setting in MAAS itself (which was fixed within the hour after Gavin pasted the conversation). That, not a problem with my branch, was what stopped the experiment before it could be completed — but by that point my changes had already completed their work, and MAAS had already accepted it. So far as we know or have reason to expect, no fixes to my branch are needed.

Julian says it's acceptable to keep working with the release images (which does mean maas-test will break until Trusty's release) and add an option to use pre-release images later, using a simpler user interface than letting the user configure paths and labels. It's not very hard, and doesn't differ much from the work we would need to do to pass a configuration file in from the command line.

Our chosen direction is to abolish bootresources.yaml. That file is universally regarded as a problem. We can execute on that plan, or we can keep second-guessing it, but either way my branch does not stand in its way. On the other hand, introducing bootresources.yaml in full detail into the user interface is committing publicly to the status quo.