-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
[BUG] UI: make explicit description for default retention for buckets #748
Comments
giubacc
added
kind/bug
Something isn't working
triage/waiting
Waiting for triage
and removed
triage/waiting
Waiting for triage
labels
Oct 6, 2023
Any suggestions on how to word the notice text instead? |
My suggestion, something like: Title: "Default bucket retention mode" |
pushing to v0.23.0 |
votdev
referenced
this issue
in votdev/s3gw-ui
Oct 23, 2023
Fixes: https://github.com/aquarist-labs/s3gw/issues/748 Signed-off-by: Volker Theile <[email protected]>
votdev
referenced
this issue
in votdev/s3gw-ui
Oct 23, 2023
Fixes: https://github.com/aquarist-labs/s3gw/issues/748 Signed-off-by: Volker Theile <[email protected]>
votdev
referenced
this issue
in votdev/s3gw-ui
Oct 23, 2023
Fixes: https://github.com/aquarist-labs/s3gw/issues/748 Signed-off-by: Volker Theile <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Describe the bug A clear and concise description of what the bug is.
Minor issue, but IMO worth to be addressed.
When creating a bucket and setting the default retention mode, I would make explicit that this is a default retention mode.
Let's keep in mind that this setting can be changed at any time. Also user can decide, explicitly, with the APIs to not even put a retention over an object (or/and over a specific version); that is completely optional.
Default retention mode only says that when there isn't an explicit setting from the user, the object takes the current default retention mode.
The current description suggests that every object will take the retention set there.
So I would change that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: