oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/omicron
wicket: Component order in the update list is different than when paging through the update screen
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 572
- Forks
- 97
- Avg merge
- 2d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 96
Description
On the initial Update Status screen that lists all sleds/switches/PSC, the order is sleds 0-31, then switches 0-1, then psc 0. However, on the next screen where updates can be triggered, we allow the operator to move through the same list, but the order is different: sleds 0-15, switch 0, psc 0, switch 1, sleds 16-31. The latter order more closely matches the actual physical order (and matches the rack overview screen); we should make the Update Status list order consistent.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the Update Status screen and the paging/trigger-update list described in the issue, then compare how each constructs its component order. Confirm the list matches the physical and rack overview order: sleds 0-15, switch 0, PSC 0, switch 1, sleds 16-31. Run the relevant UI tests if present.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- frontend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100