oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/omicron

wicket: Component order in the update list is different than when paging through the update screen

Open
#4,367 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

wicket
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

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. 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

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.