[Spacewalk-list] Re: [Spacewalk-devel] Need for 3 "views" of channels?

[Mike McCune]

Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> Justin Sherrill wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On the "Channels" page we currently have 3 different lists 
>>> ("Relevant", "All", and "Retired").  This made sense for hosted, but 
>>> for us can we rip out the "Relevant" and "Retired" lists?
>>>
>>> Currently a channel is relevant if it is x86 (32bit),  you have a 
>>> system subscribed to it, or it is a custom channel.  IMHO a channel 
>>> should be relevant if it exists on the satellite.
>> -1
>> We have in Brno satellite with a lot of channels in several arch (i386, 
>> x86_64, ppc) and if I have only i386 machine registered to this 
>> satellite, the "Relevant" shows only relevant (ie. i386) channels.
>>
>> My vote say: leave it as it is.
> 
> OK, my previous comment was crap. Now I tried it and you are correct. 
> But I still do not agree that "Relevant" should display all available on 
> sat.
> How I would like it:
> "Relevant" - channels to which my login have registered at least one 
> machine.
> "All" - channels to which my organization have entitlements.
> "Retired" - Dunno, how many users have something there...

I think the above is actually how people expect it to work.  The 
question is, on a fresh Satellite with no systems registered, we may 
want "Relevant" to actually show something, which is why I think i386 
always shows up.

Perhaps it should be:

"Relevant" - channels to which my login have registered at least one
machine.  If no machines, show same as All.
"All" - channels to which my organization have entitlements.
"Retired" - leave as-is.