Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CNV-52394: storage migration status #2373

Merged

Conversation

upalatucci
Copy link
Member

📝 Description

After clicking on Migrate, the modal will show the status and let the user decide if wants to rollback the migration

🎥 Demo

Screenshot 2025-01-20 at 12 11 05 Screenshot 2025-01-20 at 12 11 08

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 20, 2025

@upalatucci: This pull request references CNV-52394 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

📝 Description

After clicking on Migrate, the modal will show the status and let the user decide if wants to rollback the migration

🎥 Demo

Screenshot 2025-01-20 at 12 11 05 Screenshot 2025-01-20 at 12 11 08

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved This issue is something we want to fix label Jan 20, 2025
@upalatucci upalatucci force-pushed the storagemigration-stauts branch from 46ec9fe to bde4164 Compare January 20, 2025 11:16
@upalatucci upalatucci changed the title CNV-52394: storage migration status [WIP] CNV-52394: storage migration status Jan 20, 2025
@upalatucci
Copy link
Member Author

depending on #2368

@upalatucci upalatucci force-pushed the storagemigration-stauts branch from bde4164 to 59b4dde Compare January 21, 2025 16:27
@upalatucci upalatucci changed the title [WIP] CNV-52394: storage migration status CNV-52394: storage migration status Jan 21, 2025
@upalatucci upalatucci force-pushed the storagemigration-stauts branch from 59b4dde to d017680 Compare January 21, 2025 17:08
import useVirtualMachineInstanceMigration from '@kubevirt-utils/resources/vmi/hooks/useVirtualMachineInstanceMigration';

const useCurrentStorageMigration = (vm: V1VirtualMachine) => {
const [migrationStartedTime] = useState(new Date());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

u sure u need state here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it can be a ref.
I can't do a const outside the hook because it will run when this code is important but not executed.
I need the date when it's executed ( the migration start )

@upalatucci upalatucci force-pushed the storagemigration-stauts branch from d017680 to ad3c95c Compare January 24, 2025 10:26
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Passed code review, ready for merge label Jan 27, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 27, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: metalice, upalatucci

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [metalice,upalatucci]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 56d52ce into kubevirt-ui:main Jan 27, 2025
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved This issue is something we want to fix jira/valid-reference lgtm Passed code review, ready for merge
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants