[pdm-devel] [PATCH datacenter-manager 00/21] improve remote wizard

[Lukas Wagner]

On Fri May 16, 2025 at 3:35 PM CEST, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> # Summary
>
> This series improves the remote wizard in various points:
> * improved wording and texts
> * moved seperate buttons on pages into the next button
> * probing of entered nodes
> * confirmation dialog for missing fingerprints
> * better realm selector
>
> # Notes
>
> I'm not super sure about the API call structure. I think two seperate
> API calls (one for tls probing, one for scanning) might make more sense.
> If that's wanted, I'll do so in a v2 of the series.
>
> ## Probing on the server side
>
> I tried to determine if we need a fingerprint for nodes inside the
> API call, by probing each node. Since we currently only get the
> nodenames and not FQDNs in the nodelist, this will currently not
> result in a valid connection in most cases and return the fingerprint.
>
> My plan would be to include FQDNs of the nodes on the PVE side API call,
> so we can return here a list of nodename, ip and FQDNs, which the user
> then can select from. (which of those I'd probe on first check is yet
> to be determined)
>
> ## Fingerprint confirmation dialogs
>
> Not sure if we want to be able to let the user confirm the fingerprint
> so easily. On one hand it's very convenient, but maybe leads to users
> simply clicking yes without understanding what's happening.
>
> If it's deemed too dangerous, I'd rework the series without this.
>
> # Future work
>
> The next step for the wizard is to have some kind of quick copy&paste
> info. After discussing off-list with Fabian a bit, I think it would be
> best for this to contain the hostname (FQDN?) + fingerprint (if just a
> self-signed certificate) + a list of nodes with their respective
> nodename + FQDNs (maybe requires api change on PVE side to generate
> this). The user would then still have to do most of the steps currently
> necessary in the wizard, except the manual copy & pasting of
> fingerprints and maybe entering of FQDNs.
>
>

Seems like these do not apply cleanly any more, could you rebase and
send a v2? Thanks!