Manual snapshots retention
-
Why it's wrong? All the VM disks for this VM will be removed.
Remember: there's no "snapshot" object, it's only a VM with "is a snapshot: true".
-
@olivierlambert But on my side VM it's VM. Snapshot it's something else)
And not "all", "selected" sounds better. -
@olivierlambert !Delete VMs ->Delete VM Snapshots
delete 7 vms -> delete 7 VM snapshots
I you don't know as it is it scares you. Did me!
-
Yes, I get it. But that explains why the message is generic for VM removal (because it's the same that's a VM with snapshot true or false).
I agree this could improved, but I'm not sure this worth the effort vs moving forward on XO 6/XO Lite
-
@olivierlambert but on vm page it works as should.
-
@olivierlambert Now I know that there is no risk
BUT it got me scared definitely. And probably will others.Also it's just a changing of a string so it should be easy.
-
Not necessarily that easy, especially on a "legacy" code base, I truly wonder if we should invest some time on this instead of XO 6?
-
@olivierlambert Your call Β―_(γ)_/Β―
-
@olivierlambert release this year? (c)
-
I don't understand the question
XO 6 is already here and takes 90% of our XO front team load. Anything on XO 5 will slow down the number of features available in XO 6. -
@olivierlambert we are waiting for release)
at least it needs to be fixed in xo6.
-
Waiting for what? Just add
/v6to access XO 6. The "release" is just having XO 6 by default, but it's not like "now it's available". It is already the case.For XO 6, since it will be very different, you won't have exactly the same way of doing things than XO 5, but yes, it should be better in any way
-
@olivierlambert This feature was added not long ago anyway. Pity the text was put in this way.... The "concern" that it might scare others (did us) is valid as 99% use XO5 today.
So, perhaps you might save on support calls? My 2 cents anyway -
I will let XO PO to decide about this. Pinging @lsouai-vates
