Bug #9334
closed
When hover over Sat 6 UI tab: Hosts, Provision Setup is in Opposite order of configuring.
Added by Shlomi Zadok about 9 years ago.
Updated almost 6 years ago.
Description
Cloned from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191634
Description of problem:
In the Satellite 6 UI: When you hover over the tab: Hosts, the bottom half of the list displays: Provisioning Setup, followed by 6 labels. These 6 labels are in the opposite order from the way you would actually configure. In other words, you work from bottom up. Customers and GSS would prefer to work from top down.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. In Satellite 6 UI, hover over the tab: Hosts
Actual results:
Provisioning Setup
Operating systems
Provisioning templates
Partition tables
Installation media
Hardware models
Architectures
Expected results:
Provisioning Setup
Architectures
Hardware models
Installation media
Partition tables
Provisioning templates
Operating systems
- Category set to Web Interface
- Assignee set to Shlomi Zadok
- Status changed from New to Ready For Testing
- Pull request https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/pull/2151 added
- Pull request deleted (
- Status changed from Ready For Testing to Rejected
The labels are orignally ordered so that the top values are the most used ones. Architectures and hardware models are barely used once they're setup and putting them first seems counter intuitive. Please reopen if you want to continue the discussion. Sorry!
- Status changed from Rejected to Need more information
Jumping in here (and re-opening) as I'd like to give my input and I think this is valid. Generally, menu's are read left to right and top to bottom and are built to convey a flow. I start on the left and work my way down and then I go right and do the same thing. The Katello menu ordering was built with this in mind, and so was the last re-organization of the Foreman menu. I understand the putting the most used earlier, however, given you aren't moving your mouse or digging through a long list, as the bug indicates, conveying a workflow helps users. Kyle Baker can probably give more insight from user testing so I'll ping him to reply as well.
I 100% agree with Eric and OP here. Ideally the order should reflect the primary use case. UX best practices say that menu order implies workflow. We should reflect that with this new proposed menu. There really is no disadvantage here since positioning of the common tasks toward the top does not provide any time savings.
- Assignee changed from Shlomi Zadok to Daniel Lobato Garcia
- Status changed from Need more information to Ready For Testing
- Status changed from Ready For Testing to Closed
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
- translation missing: en.field_release set to 35
Also available in: Atom
PDF
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by