Skip to content

Automatically approve a change request that is only decreasing quota values #194

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
7 tasks
knikolla opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #207
Open
7 tasks

Automatically approve a change request that is only decreasing quota values #194

knikolla opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #207
Assignees
@QuanMPhm

Comments

@knikolla
Copy link
Collaborator

Depends on nerc-project/coldfront-nerc#132

This is a foundational first step in automating approvals for common PI operations. As this is decreasing a quota, it does not require an admin to confirm the availability of resources requested by the PI.
@knikolla knikolla mentioned this issue Feb 26, 2025
Open
2 tasks
@QuanMPhm
Copy link
Contributor

QuanMPhm commented Mar 7, 2025

  • Make a decision whether we want to verify that the resource allocation is consuming less resources than the quota decrease requested.

@knikolla What is the status of this decision?

@joachimweyl
Copy link

@syockel & @waygil Please weigh in on whether we want to verify that the resource allocation is consuming less resources than the quota decrease requested. This is in reference to Automatically approving a change request that is only decreasing quota values.

@morantara
Copy link

@syockel @waygil reupping Kim's above question :)

@QuanMPhm
Copy link
Contributor

QuanMPhm commented Apr 2, 2025 •
edited
Loading

During today's 1PM meeting, we have the green light to implement this feature, but we want to code to not allow the case where the user sets the quota to 0

@QuanMPhm QuanMPhm linked a pull request Apr 7, 2025 that will close this issue
Open
@QuanMPhm
Copy link
Contributor

I will put this issue on hold for now until #208 is merged, since that PR implements features that this issue will likely build upon.

@morantara
Copy link

@QuanMPhm should this be pushed to the next sprint while we wait for the merge?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@QuanMPhm QuanMPhm

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@knikolla @joachimweyl @QuanMPhm @morantara