Code review comment for lp:~newell-jensen/maas/amt_wsman
Revision history for this message
| Jeff Lane (bladernr) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
35a32c5
(Get the code!)
> I don't think the UI needs to indicate what version of AMT for the moment;
> this template change should be transparent to the end user -- if they have
> wsman installed, and it's AMT9, it works. I had intended to keep amttool
> support in to minimize change, so I'm not sure why this being being
> rediscussed.
I agree, UI changes should come at a later date if necessary. As for amttool support, I understand what you're saying, my only point was that if wsman works for both older and new/current AMT versions, is there a benefit to keeping two tools around that do essentially the same job if one tool works for all?
In any case, I also think that is something to revisit later, not as part of this proposal.
> I don't think we should convert this template to Python in the same step as
> making this change.
Also agreed, I meant to imply that too would be revisited at a later date, that's up to You and Andres and Andy to mull over as we now have two teams responsible for MAAS upkeep, the MAAS team and Server Enablement.