> This is absolutely true. We had, at one time, considered adding a state > machine (or similar) to Foreman, so that such things (as well as boot > loops in Kickstart, and so forth) could be detected, but it was never > completed. >
State machine would be nice as it allows for more actions to be taken for a machine in different states. For example, in some other threads, I was asking about ability to use RemoteExec for discovered hosts, not just managed hosts as it is now. Proper hooks for systems entering/leaving any of those states also open up a lot of opportunities. > As Lukas says, a full refactor may well happen, and we'd love input on > that as we go forward. Any of you, guys, going to PuppetConf this year? If so, can we meet and have a discussion on this maybe? I think I agree - the hosts should keep retrying until they get a > response from Foreman, but then actions can be taken. I'd probably be > in favour of keeping the retry (so that, say, if the offending MAC is > removed in Foreman, the host can register on the next retry), but > perhaps split the process into two calls. The first is a light "am I > registered?" call that returns true/false, and only if false would the > heavier registration call be made. Does that work? > Yes, this would definitely work. This is also is one of the states of a system in the state machine we talked about above. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to foreman-users@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
